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

Re: Extension spec for hgroup (Was: Re: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:28:42 -0700
Cc: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-pf@w3.org" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> (janina@rednote.net)" <janina@rednote.net>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org> (jbrewer@w3.org)" <jbrewer@w3.org>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Message-id: <970D86DC-4438-4154-B156-C0BB6B3771D9@apple.com>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>

On Sep 20, 2012, at 4:17 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi maciej,
> 
>> (2) I don't believe there is any implementation of the outline algorithm, which is where the semantics of hgroup matter. In my personal opinion, the outline >algorithm as a whole should be marked "at-risk" at the very least.
> 
> hgroup  (if implemented) as currently deifined effects (negatively I
> think) the semantics exposed to AT independent of the the outline
> algorithm, so outline is not the only situation that hgroup semantics
> matter.

Fair enough. That would likely mean that either the accessibility behavior or the hgroup element itself would be "at risk" features, if that behavior has not been implemented.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 16:29:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2012 16:29:13 GMT