W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2011

Re: revert request for spec change http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=6609&to=6610

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 08:09:52 -0500
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, jbrewer@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFDDA03A00.FA5CC4FB-ON8625791E.0047E0B7-8625791E.00485098@us.ibm.com>

I support a revert. The chairs have already reached consensus on the use of
role for these elements. No formal proposal was made and even if it was no
evidence was provided to support these assertions which Ian has simply
raised again without formal proposal.

Should this be allowed I would argue that all members be allowed editor
writes to change the spec. whenever they please.


Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group

From:	Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
To:	Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTMLWG WG
            <public-html@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>,
            Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc:	Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, HTML Accessibility Task
            Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Date:	10/02/2011 07:27 AM
Subject:	revert request for spec change

Dear Chairs,
The html5 editor has made a conformance change to the a element in respect
to theARIA  roles that can be used.

The conformance requirements present in the spec prior to the change
were the result of this working group decision

subsequently a bug was filed:


this bug proffers no new data or evidence, it simply states:

"Should disallow <a> elements to be made into buttons, checkboxes, radio
buttons, tabs, or tree items, since those are all semantic abuse"

On the baseis of the above comment the editor made the change. The
rationale provided by the editor proffered no new data or evidence only
vague staments about 'hurting accessibility'

Vague unsubstantiated statements are not sufficient to override a working
group decision, Changing the conformance requirements  because "Hixie said
so" is not a convincing reason as hixie himself [1] said so recently.

 I therefor request that this change be reverted (

If the editor can bring new data to the working group then of course the
issue can be reconsidered

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
Web Accessibility Toolbar -

(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

Received on Monday, 3 October 2011 13:15:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:17 UTC