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

Re: Change proposal for ISSUE-85

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:05:49 +0200
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20100606220549761354.ef6c0b1e@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Ian Hickson, Sun, 6 Jun 2010 19:27:24 +0000 (UTC):
> On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, Sam Ruby wrote:
  []
> What's important to remember is that there are more than two kinds of user 
> agents; there are at least three:   
>
> 1. User agents with scripting, CSS, etc, [] 
> 2. User agents with ATs []
> 3. User agents without CSS,[] scripting [] and [] without ATs
  []
> The only way to keep things consistent amongst all three is to use HTML 
> elements appropriately, and not override their semantics with ARIA.
  []
> Updated change proposal with the above:
  []
> Don't allow people to use ARIA to write inaccessible documents.

I don't understand why we you want us to perceive 'accessible' and 
'consistent [across user agents]' as synonyms.

  [...[
> The only way to keep things consistent amongst all three is to use HTML 
> elements appropriately, and not override their semantics with ARIA.
>
> ARIA is great when you're creating new widgets that aren't in HTML yet: it 
> allows you to create pages that work in #1 and #2, covering the vast 
> majority of users, at the cost of #3, who wouldn't be able to experience 
> the new widget at all anyway. However, when HTML provides the widget you 
> need, as in the case of a button or a link, and #3 already supports that 
> widget and therefore there is no need to fake it.

HTML5 does not forbid us from saying <div role="button"> or <div 
role="link">. To follow your line to the end, it really should be 
forbidden ...

One reason to allow <a> elements to have different ARIA semantics in #3 
compared to what they may have in #1 and #2 is that it allow us to use 
approximation in the choice of widget element. An <a> element is closer 
to the semantics of a button than a <div> is. Thus it allows us to 
create something that has a useful fallback in #3.

  []
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 6 June 2010 20:06:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:18 UTC