W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2009

Re: ARIA roles added to the a element should be conforming in HTML5.

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:36:40 -0700
Message-ID: <63df84f0910220636l17c79354q4f048e36dd35fb9b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Leif Halvard Silli
<xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> Lars Gunther On 09-10-22 01.53:
>
>> 2009-10-21 15:11, Shelley Powers skrev:
>>>
>>> If you go out and search on Google for "CSS link button" you get many
>>> tutorials, examples, etc, that focus on styling links as buttons. If
>>> you search on "JavaScript link button" you get many libraries that
>>> support this functionality.
>
>
> [...]
>
>> So while I do not agree - this time - with Steve and Shelley, I must
>> emphasize that the wording on the error messages in the validator must
>> strongly suggest using the button element, and really not be worded in any
>> way that discourages the use of ARIA.
>
> I think the issue must be split it two:
>
> (1) If there is conflict between the role attribute the element, then should
> the validator assume that a misapplied role or a misapplied element?
>
> (2) What kind of roles are the <a> element meant for?

There's also the question, "Should any role be allowed on any
element". For example I asked earlier in this thread if it should be
conforming to have an <h1> element with ARIA attributes indicating
that it is a botton. It seemed like at least some people thought that
that should be conforming.

/ Jonas
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 13:37:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC