- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:56:41 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, "public-html-request@w3.org" <public-html-request@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Hi Maciej I would like a response to this email ( below) before the change is applied Regards Stevef On 14 Apr 2011, at 08:58, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Maciej, > >> So far, there are no objections to Ian's proposed text, linked here: >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=976&action=edit >> >> Steve has reviewed it and said he can live with it, and believes it is close enough to the decision as written. > > > As there is only one word difference (in regards to my proposed diff and Ians) > I ask Ian to add 'heading' to the allowable roles as it allowing it is consistent with all other elements that have a default role. > > This would save time and effort on the part of all parties. If Ian will not agree It would be appreciated if he can provide a clear technical reason for not doing so. > > > Ians: > > "heading role, with the aria-level property set to the element's outline depth > Role must be either link, menuitem, menuitemcheckbox, menuitemradio, > tab, or treeitem" > > mine explcilty allows the headings role, rather than implicitly: > > "heading role, with the aria-level property set to the element's outline depth > Role must be either HEADING link, menuitem, menuitemcheckbox, > menuitemradio, tab, or treeitem" > > > regards > stevef > > On 14 April 2011 02:00, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Apr 12, 2011, at 1:09 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Steve Faulkner wrote: >>>> >>>> I have provided am updated set of spec changes for review by the working >>>> group: http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/aria-changesv2.html >>> >>> This does not accurately reflect the decision. If we're going to correct >>> the mistakes in the decision, we should correct all of them, not just the >>> ones you want to correct. >>> >>> Maciej suggested that instead we should apply the decision as the chairs >>> made it, and then file bugs to address the issues arising. I suggest we >>> follow his advice instead of trying to fix the mistakes here. >> >> So far, there are no objections to Ian's proposed text, linked here: >> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=976&action=edit >> >> Steve has reviewed it and said he can live with it, and believes it is close enough to the decision as written. >> >> We will bring this up as a topic at tomorrow's telecon. If we hear no objections tomorrow, or within 24 hours (i.e. by 10 AM Pacific Time Friday), then we will deem this diff an acceptable implementation of the decision, and follow-up issues can be tracked as bugs. >> >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >> > > > > -- > with regards > > Steve Faulkner > Technical Director - TPG > > www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner > HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ > Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html > >
Received on Friday, 15 April 2011 02:02:08 UTC