W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > February 2009

Re: ARIA style sheet

From: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:02:44 +0800
Message-ID: <faf3cb2b0902260602j6b623cd8j8c60ee68a4f0f9f7@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: Chris Blouch <cblouch@aol.com>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Chris Blouch <chris.blouch@corp.aol.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
I would tend to agree XBL seems to be more appropriate here. Firefox
has several examples of ARIA + XBL usage, these are XUL and XFroms
control elements. Is there more or less complex examples how ARIA
styles could help?

Alex Surkov.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:30:11 +0900, Chris Blouch <cblouch@aol.com> wrote:
>> I need to make a retraction in that the actual author is Stuart Langridge
>> who came up with the solution in response to a presentation by Matt Machell.
>> That said, Stuart has posted some clarity on what his solution is and is
>> not. I believe he argues for himself more clearly than I did:
>> http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2009/02/25/updates-on-the-aria-stylesheet-hack
> I still think the right answer is XBL.
> As for this points under 4:
>  1. This is also true for e.g. event handlers. XBL solves this.
>  2. <link rel="aria"> is not valid either. Also, by the time this would
>    actually work in browsers I'm sure we fixed validation for ARIA.
>    (In fact, I think validator.nu already validates it to quite some
>    extend today.)
>  3. ARIA is typically for applications that do not really have lots of
>    pages so this argument is dubious. Besides that extra network hits
>    are costly. Anyway, XBL solves this too.
> --
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2009 14:03:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:51:39 UTC