- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:01:46 +0000
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> wrote: > The tension-- not contradiction -- is about interactive elements. There seems to be some thought that @hidden elements ought to be interactive (for the UA). Not just "some thought", but what ARIA specifies. You can relabel this contradiction a "tension" if you want, but it's still something specifiers, authors, and implementors need to resolve. > I disagree. That's fine, but if that turns out to be the WG position it should be communicated to PFWG and that disagreement should be marked as a wilful violation. > Regardless-- ARIA follows whatever the host has in place. Citation required. > And at this point, HTML5 @hidden rests on CSS display none. Citation required. What does "rests on" mean here, in spec terms? HTML5 maps @hidden to aria-hidden="true" and the processing of such implicit semantics is defined by ARIA. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 09:02:17 UTC