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

Re: aria mappings

From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:45:09 -0400
Message-ID: <fb6fbf560909221945n4a6daec0jc6054bea5a995495@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Jim Jewett wrote:
>> input type=color and input type= (datetime, date, month, week, time,
>> datetime-local) are defined with no role.

>> I think that these should have role=spinbutton

> In practice, I don't think the UIs for these will be useful to reflect to
> assistive technology as if it were a spin button.

I think datepicker would be much better, but that role doesn't seem to
exist in aria.  And I have certainly used interfaces that required me
to pick a date by hitting the little "arrow" glyph way too often.

How would you recommend AT represent these input types?  As text
fields with validity patterns?

> For many of these controls, there are multiple viable implementation
> strategies for the exact UI. I don't think the spec should assume a
> particular implementation in designating the accessibility behavior.

Is the (aria-)role supposed to represent the physical implementation
that happens to have been chosen, or the underlying semantics?

Should the AT see the same underlying date field differently depending
on which browser is being used (and how that browser vendor decided to
style the chooser for sighted users)?

(And are these questions that need to be formally asked of the pfwg?)

-jJ
Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 02:46:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:48 GMT