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: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:49:02 +0200
Message-ID: <4AE070DE.2090408@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.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>
Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-10-22 16.42:

> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:


>> Why should ARIA work any different from CSS?
>>
>> I think, in general, it only becomes difficult for authors, for spec editors
>> - for everyone - if we mix what authors should do (semantics) with how user
>> agents should act (parsing etc).
> 
> Because ARIA and CSS are different things.  Why should they work
> similarly?  ARIA is nothing than a patch to help out users of ATs when
> authors use elements in novel ways, such as using <div>s to implement
> sliders.  It's not meant as a general tool to be used by the average
> author - with luck, a normal author never has to get anywhere *near*
> ARIA, because they're using elements for what they're intended for.
> 
> As well, it's really just more trouble than it's worth to restrict CSS
> to only apply 'conforming' styling - the operations are too low-level
> to sanely constrain.  ARIA, on the other hand, is a high-level tool
> that *can* be sanely restricted.

To make <h1 role="button"> non-conforming *is* to restrict how it 
can be used and *is* to treat ARIA different from CSS.

The only likeness between CSS and ARIA that I suggested, is that 
ARIA should over-rule the default semantics, the same way that CSS 
should overrule default styling.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 14:49:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:50 GMT