W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2013

RE: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and HTML5 <main> element

From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:01:40 -0000
To: "'Harry Loots'" <harry.loots@ieee.org>, "'Steve Faulkner'" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: "'W3C WAI ig'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'JF'" <john@foliot.ca>
Message-ID: <009d01ce2b04$5ed3de90$1c7b9bb0$@tink.co.uk>
Harry Loots wrote:

“Here's how the Hixon proposal may work:

tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip ->
(jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, allow
user to read/view; 
next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view; 
next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow user to
read/view; 
next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....”

 

But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?

 

Léonie.

 

 

-- 

Carpe diem.

 

From: harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] On
Behalf Of Harry Loots
Sent: 27 March 2013 14:59
To: Steve Faulkner
Cc: W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF
Subject: Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and
HTML5 <main> element

 

Hi again Steve

 

re:

... one principle is a thought experiment, the other is implemented and used
already, 

Which of the proposals are already implemented? I thought that "<main>" was
a proposal for 5.1?


I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is worthwhile to define how it would
work in practice and get implementers interested in making it real.

 

Here's how the Hixon proposal may work:

tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip ->
(jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, allow
user to read/view; 
next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view; 
next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow user to
read/view; 
next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....

Regards

Harry

 

 

On 27 March 2013 12:07, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Harry, 

 

and Ian's proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use
role=main or <main>.

 

problem is its not a perfect fail safe I have actually looked into a
heuristic approach and like most heuristics it fails at times. From HTML
data I collected and reviewed [1] I found that exclusion was not a reliable
indicator. 

 

There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist


of course, bit one principle is a thought experiment, the other is
implemented and used already, I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is
worthwhile to define how it would work in practice and get implementers
interested in making it real.


[1] http://webdevdata.org/





with regards

--
SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> 

 

On 27 March 2013 10:50, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:

Steve

you're right arguing is senseless...

However, it's worth considering the principle Ian promotes:

That the UA ignores (the way I understand what he proposes)
<header><nav><footer><aside><etc> and lands on <main>, e.g., (my
understanding/interpretation) by using a built-in short-cut key exposed to
all users.

There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist, and Ian's
proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use role=main or
<main>.

Kind regards

Harry





 

On 27 March 2013 11:14, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all, this discussion appears to be going nowhere

We have landmark semantics that are interoperably supported across browsers
and AT, we have evidence to suggest that users find them useful.
We have mapping of  landmarks built in to HTML structural elements (in
various stages of implementation)
We have evidence to suggest that authors understand how to implement
landmarks.


Then we have a thought experiment from hixie that says hey you don't need
those landmarks especially role=main. This idea has been brought up over and
over by Hixie (note it was rejected on his home turf at the WHATWG) and
never gained any traction, browser implementers rejected it in favour of
adding the <main> element ( a number of whom have already implemented it).

So we now have a method that works (is supported out of the box by AT) and
work is also happening to build upon it to provide a simple browser built in
skip to content feature that any user can make use of, so in time the
necessity of providing a skip link will diminish.

It would therefore seem more productive to be debating other topics.





with regards

--
SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> 

 

On 27 March 2013 08:50, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:

Ian Hickson wrote:
"In the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The user
indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting content
and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the same kind
of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a specific landmark
role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting content and jumps
straight to the content the user wants (the same content as would be marked
with <main> or role=main)."

>From the user's point of view I think this is right. The phrases
"interesting" and "uninteresting" are too subjective to be helpful, but
essentially a single command that moves focus to the start of the main
content area of the page is the goal.

>From an implementation point of view I think this is inefficient. It's more
reliable and less process intensive to move from A to Z, than it is to move
from A, to B, to C, to D and so on until all that remains by a process of
elimination is Z.

So if the goal is to have a single mechanism for moving directly to a given
point on the page, what's the hook the UA uses to make that possible?


Léonie.
--
Carpe diem.



-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch]
Sent: 27 March 2013 02:11
To: JF
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and
HTML5 <main> element

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, JF wrote:
>
> A man arrives at the San Jose airport in Silicon Valley.
>
> "I want to go to the campus" he tells the cab driver.
>
> "The Stanford campus?", asks the cabbie.
>
> [...]

Could you explain to me how this analogy corresponds to the discussion? In
the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The user
indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting content
and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the same kind
of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a specific landmark
role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting content and jumps
straight to the content the user wants (the same content as would be marked
with <main> or role=main).

The user experience is _exactly_ the same as the experience possible with
explicit landmark roles. The only difference is how it is marked up.

--
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'




 

 

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2013 16:02:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 16:02:23 UTC