W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Split Issue 30?

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:19:10 -0800
Message-ID: <4F3856FE.8080403@jumis.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html@w3.org
On 2/12/2012 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> >
>> >  Jonas, you have a different perspective too. That's OK, too. Multiple
>> >  viewpoints are a good thing. We are fleshing out real issues in this
>> >  process.
> It sounds like your only objection to allowing aria-describedby to
> point to @hidden elements is that it will delay publishing a finalized
> HTML5 spec. That is certainly an understandable argument, though given
> the extreme inertia for changing semantics of existing features, I'd
> rather spec the @hidden attribute correction from the beginning, than
> wait to fix it in HTML6.

My comment was intended as: we should wait to break current behavior, 
until HTML6. If you want to consider it like breaking a bone to reset 
it, that's the idea.
The current situation of position, visibility: hidden and display: none 
is well tested, and I am certainly being conservative in my position of 
altering core CSS architecture.

As I understand it, @hidden is a shortcut for display: none, in 
implementation and markup and may be implemented through the css 
selector: [hidden] { display: none; }.

I'm concerned about the structural problems of altering the CSSOM 
behavior display: none.

I'm concerned that encouraging display: none for perceivable content may 
lead to a digital divide for users of older browsers and ATs.

It's certainly possible for @hidden to be decoupled from display: none, 
I don't know what kind of compatibility fallout we'd see.

My objection is that altering display: none may break some strong 
precedents and long standing practices and that @hidden may mean a 
distinction between sighted and non-sighted interfaces. The language 
itself is discriminatory.

While we do say "hidden" or "display"; the effect of those two is very 
specific and technical it's about the side-effects of the object, not 
about visibility. Altering @hidden may make it about visibility.

I have no objections about aria-describedby -- I'd like to see more 
vendor discussion about flowto and describedby.
It's altering the semantics of @hidden that I'm concerned about. I'm 
also concerned about the long-lasting tug of war to maintain <img 

Those are three separate issues, that weave in and out of this thread. 
They're connected, because they're part of your proposal. You're trying 
to work with those semantics, and I seem to be rather immovable on 
@hidden and @longdesc.
I think there's a lot of good that can come from focusing on ARIA flow. 
But right now, we're looking at two attributes that I'd rather have left 

Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 00:19:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:26:06 UTC