W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: ISSUE-96 Change Proposal

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:54:47 -0600
Message-ID: <g2y643cc0271004011154k95fe8561s2b24688a8431544e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I was sold. And now you're telling me, this is nothing more than a bridge?
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/introduction#co-evolution explains it
>>> pretty well. It starts out with
>>>
>>> "WAI-ARIA is intended to be a bridging technology."
>>>
>>> And later says
>>>
>>> "It is expected that, over time, host languages will evolve to provide
>>> semantics for objects that previously could only be declared with
>>> WAI-ARIA. This is natural and desirable, as one goal of WAI-ARIA is to
>>> help stimulate the emergence of more semantic markup."
>>>
>>
>> So when can we expect a color picker element in SVG?
>
> This seems like a question better asked the SVG WG.
>
> Ignoring that, I'm not sure how a color picker for SVG would work
> since SVG doesn't have forms (yet?).
>
> Ignoring that, the claim is that ARIA is a bridging technology, not a
> useless technology. So I'm not sure I understand the point of your
> question. Whatever the date is, ARIA will work as a bridge to that
> date.
>

The point I'm making is that we can never expect to have all behaviors
packaged into all host languages. A better approach is to define the
semantics using ARIA, and then use ARIA within the different
languages. And just like CSS, evangelize ARIA, until
developers/designers are as comfortable supporting it, as they are CSS
now.

What we're doing with something like progress, is welding
behavior/style/structure, and evidently accessibility into one object.
You think this is a good idea? What would you think if 15 years ago,
rather than CSS, we welded style and structure into an element, called
it FONT?

Technology can not solve problems that arise with human attitudes and
ignorance. You're all trying to route around the human, the developer
and designer, rather than confront the problem where it really exists.

Now, in defense of the developer and designer, we haven't been
building accessibility into many of our applications in the past,
because we didn't have the capability. Now, we do. Now comes the
challenging part -- changing attitudes, and educating the ignorance.

We'll need this no matter what, because you can't depend on building
everything we need into HTML. I can't even imagine why the WAI group
thought this was possible.


> / Jonas
>

Shelley
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 18:55:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:16 UTC