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: Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:32:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CA++-QFd0fpiyHLorM=-1QC=id9AM9zU+O5Hcai8pW0LexOCS+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk>, W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, JF <john@foliot.ca>
Thanks Steve
sounds like a way forward.

I'd think that this should be an extension to your <main>. So for example,
if a jump to <main> is initiated by CTRL+[KEY] then negotiating block to
block could be CTRL+SHFT+[KEY], so that it may be both an extension to
<main> or a fall-back if <main> is not declared in the code.


Take care
Harry



On 27 March 2013 19:00, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi harry,
>
> as previously mentioned a way forward is to define how the feature would
> work and get interest from implementers. That's what I did with <main> and
> anybody can do it with this feature
>
>
> with regards
>
> --
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
>
>
> On 27 March 2013 17:32, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not suggesting it should be used instead of <main> / role=main, but
>> in addition to.
>> The advantage of <main> is you can jump directly to it; the disadvantage
>> is that you can only jump to one block of content.
>>
>> The advantage of the Hickson proposal, is that you can jump from one
>> block of (interesting) content to the next (e.g.: there may be several
>> articles in the page, and not just one, i.e., blog). By jumping from
>> headline to headline you could quickly 'scan' through content in the page.
>> <main> will only be able to get you to the first heading. I could even,
>> halfway through an article decide I don't want to read further and jump to
>> the next one.
>>
>> I can see strengths in both approaches. And I can see reason for both to
>> exit side by side and increase the ability of keyboard users to rapidly
>> move through a page. Providing people with multiple means to get to
>> content, can only make the web more accessible.
>>
>>
>> Take care
>> Harry
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 18:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Harry Loots wrote:****
>>>
>>> “Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you
>>> traverse header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...”****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Sorry, I meant inefficient from a UA implementation point of view. If
>>> the objective is to move focus directly to the start of the main content,
>>> it seems that hooking into a specific element is a more efficient and
>>> reliable way to do it than by using a process of elimination. ****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> “The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump
>>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with
>>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have
>>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip
>>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks.”*
>>> ***
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> We already have that ability (in screen readers at least). HTML5
>>> elements and/or the ARIA landmark roles they map to facilitate movement
>>> between chunks of content using a single key command.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> One of the attractions of the main element is that it could facilitate a
>>> single command to move focus directly to the main content area of the page.
>>> Essentially like a skip link, but one that can be invoked from anywhere on
>>> the page not just when focus is on a particular anchor.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> This is already possible with role=”main” of course. The advantage of
>>> mapping the main role to an HTML5 element is that it becomes a native part
>>> of HTML, which increases the likelyhood it’ll be used.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> So whether you move from one chunk of content to another and finally
>>> arrive at the main content, or want to move directly to the main content
>>> area, hooking that interaction into a specific element would seem to be the
>>> most sensible way to approach it.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Léonie.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> -- ****
>>>
>>> Carpe diem.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> *From:* harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Harry Loots
>>> *Sent:* 27 March 2013 16:30
>>> *To:* tink@tink.co.uk
>>> *Cc:* Steve Faulkner; W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF
>>>
>>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main"
>>> and HTML5 <main> element****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Hi Léonie****
>>>
>>> But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?****
>>>
>>> Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you
>>> traverse header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...****
>>>
>>> The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump
>>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with
>>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have
>>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip
>>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks. *
>>> ***
>>>
>>> Take care****
>>>
>>> Harry****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> On 27 March 2013 17:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:****
>>>
>>> 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 Thursday, 28 March 2013 10:32:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 28 March 2013 10:32:49 UTC