W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > April 2012

Fwd: Re: Alternative to @aria-describedAT: <a role=img>

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 15:47:10 +0200
To: wai-xtech <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120409154710242262.3aa7d678@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Forward to the list - due to address error.

----- Begin forwarded message -----
From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 07:49:14 +0100
Subject: Re: Alternative to @aria-describedAT: <a role=img>
To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no>, "wai-xtech@w3.org" 
<faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
<CA+epNsdtDwc5pHBwrdcHSsh-8GqsQ94EPr1BWAP56hsk64G=Bw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Alexander Surkov
<surkov.alexander@gmail.com> wrote:
> <a role=img href> is a real edge case and it doesn't sound a good ARIA
> use case.

I tend to agree that it's not a good use of ARIA, but this doesn't
help us: if ARIA markup becomes commonplace, bad usages will become
commonplace, and we need to define how those usages should be
interoperably interpreted.

> Also look at:
> "user agents MUST use the semantic of the WAI-ARIA role for
> processing, not the native semantic, unless the role requires WAI-ARIA
> states and properties whose attributes are explicitly forbidden on the
> native element by the host language"
> 
> <a role="img" href> is not described case but the most interesting
> part that ARIA doesn't require to ignore the native semantics blindly.

I think the most natural interpretation of the cited text is that it
does require that user agents to exclude native semantics from the
accessibility tree in this case, since no attributes required by role
"img" are forbidden on <a>. The "jump" action is part of the semantics
of <a>.

> It sounds reasonable with me if ARIA would add or extend native
> semantics rather than completely remove it.

I suspect extension is a lot harder to define, understand, and express
in platform accessibility APIs than replacement. I think the ARIA spec
requires replacement, but as so often it's not really clear. Maybe
PFWG could improve things here.

> From the user/web author point of view I don't see any benefits that AT 
> users see an image but
> sighted users see a normal link.

Indeed. Hence <a role="img"> is non-conforming in HTML5.

   http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/wai-aria.html#wai-aria


Unfortunately, we still need to define what it does, since
non-conforming ARIA roles still apply.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Monday, 9 April 2012 13:47:41 GMT

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