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

RE: ARIA roles added to the a element should be conforming in HTML5.

From: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:07:41 +0100
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8EA44C66E2911C4AB21558F4720695DC5D846A8428@DEWDFECCR01.wdf.sap.corp>
Sorry guys,

this discussion is a little bit wired and comes far too late.

Since HTML4 came out it was possible to "sell" a Heading as a link by doing

<A href="someref"><H2> Details Chapter</H2></A>

Why hasn't anybody complained before? Why now for ARIA? I don't understand.

There are SO MANY examples of HTML misuse without ARIA. 
ARIA is to bridge the gap, not to enlarge it.

Regards
Stefan

-----Original Message-----
From: wai-xtech-request@w3.org [mailto:wai-xtech-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Leif Halvard Silli
Sent: Dienstag, 10. November 2009 20:38
To: Tab Atkins Jr.
Cc: John Foliot; Charles McCathieNevile; Jonas Sicking; Lars Gunther; Shelley Powers; HTMLWG WG; W3C WAI-XTECH
Subject: Re: ARIA roles added to the a element should be conforming in HTML5.

Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-11-10 19.46:

> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu> wrote:
>> We all can pretty much agree that making an <h1> a 'button' doesn't really
>> make a whole lot of semantic sense, 


[...]


> Since I brought up that example, that sort of markup actually isn't a
> bad idea in my opinion.  Now it would probably be better done with
> <details>, but when that didn't exist a <div><h1/><p/></div> was a
> good approximation of the semantics.  In some cases it still might be
> better semantically, for example if you were implementing a tab-based
> interface in js.
> 
> *Is* it most helpful to convey to ATs that the heading is a button in
> that example?  Are there better ways to do it?  You really
> can't/shouldn't use an actual <button> in the example, because it's
> *not* semantically a button, it's a heading.  It's only when you bring
> behavior into the mix that acquires a slightly different character.


I would think that the reason that you shouldn't use a button is 
because it isn't a  button because it isn't inside a form.

Well, it is still a button - even outside a <form>, but a button 
outside the form element - what use is that? Why doesn't HTML 5 
say that it is invalid, like HTML 4 does?
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 11 November 2009 09:08:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 13:16:07 GMT