W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2014

Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:25:14 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VndCh9DK=DRQudSX5mJ5rKEP82XXYZU5ZO33CFY+PprWA@mail.gmail.com>
To: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On 7 April 2014 20:06, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> Should there be a particular need for an accessible name for the <details>
> control, ARIA can be used to set the name. But I must admit to not
> understanding why you would need that in practice, if the page is well
> written. (I find most pages that use accessible labels in situations such
> as this tend to be poorly written for non-AT users.)
>

All controls are expected to have an accessible name and it is expected
that the author is able to assign one. this is accessibility 101 across all
platforms. Lack of an accessible name or a generic accessible name or an
ambiguous accessible name causes issues for users.

What's the mechanism by which the anonymous control for details can be
assigned an accessible name?

Why is avoiding Web components a goal? That's like saying it's unfortunate
that nails don't provide enough flexibility to be driven into walls
without recourse to a hammer.

avoiding unnecessary recourse to web component use is a reasonable and
expected goal - built in vs bolt on accessibility is better. Having to use
a web component to overcome the inability to make a html control usable
without relying on CSS and Js and ARIA is unfortunate, and as you said
yesterday

"once you're using custom components you've pretty much sacrificed the
ability for the web to work without css and js, especially if you don't
have a fallback element..."
http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20140407#l-396




--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2014 12:26:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:28 UTC