- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 09:44:49 +0100
- To: lwatson@paciellogroup.com
- CC: 'W3C WAI Protocols & Formats' <public-pfwg@w3.org>
Hi Léonie, Thanks for the post. I'm also tracking this whole discussion with some interest and I agree that the judicious application of ARIA is a great complement to Web components. The question that has been rattling around my brain, is do we need to expand ARIA ad nauseam? Partially because I feel that if we have a semantic carte blanche type situation, when many devs in reality struggle with the basics, I worry about an AT/A11y API tower of babel scenario - while well intentioned may just degrade the user experience. In short, a constraints based approach to the application of a11y semantics may serve our cause better in the long run. My 2 cents Josh Watson wrote: > Hello, > > > > Web components offer exciting possibilities, and accessibility is going to > need to keep pace with this potential. This came up at EdgeConf recently, > where ARIA was widely thought to be the solution amongst developers. > > > > I’m not sure that ARIA (as it stands) can keep pace with the near infinite > range of components that developers could/will create? It seems improbable > that the ARIA spec could ever encompass every/any element/role that a > developer might conjure up. > > > > Jeremy Keith made this point at EdgeConf, and also suggested the possibility > of ARIA becoming extensible [1]. > > > > I thought it was worth raising here for discussion. Apologies if it’s > already being discussed here or elsewhere. > > > > Léonie. > > [1] http://adactio.com/journal/6719/ > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2014 08:45:20 UTC