- From: Matthew Atkinson <m.atkinson@samsung.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 19:44:40 -0000
- To: "'W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures'" <public-apa@w3.org>
Dear colleagues, I wanted to draw APA's attention to some updates on CSS threads that both APA and TAG have been reviewing. We would like to see if we can put together some questions from APA on the call on Wednesday, hence emailing about this ahead of time. You may recall that APA got flagged in a comment that relates to CSS scrolling (<https://github.com/w3c/a11y-review/issues/224> - though that's just for background info, so those of you who looked at that thread have a point of reference). With respect to that thread, we were trying to figure out the broader picture. That picture relates to the overall desire to do carousels declaratively in HTML and CSS. In order to be more flexible/broadly of use, that feature - carousels - has been split into several smaller features (which include the scrolling issue we looked at). There is a TAG design review thread for the full set of proposals (<https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1037> - but, again, that's just for context; relevant links for Wednesday are coming up). The helpful thing about the TAG thread is that it links to the Explainer for the overall set of proposals (<https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/blob/main/css-overflow-5/carousel-expl ainer.md>). TAG also split out each proposal (e.g. scroll buttons, CSS inert) into separate design review threads. The current issue that needs our attention is CSS inert. Here's the TAG design review thread for CSS inert, which already contains some accessibility questions and concerns: <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1055> - notably from Martin (who is a current TAG member) and Alice (who is a former TAG member, and a key proponent of the Accessibility Object Model work). Two areas of potential concern, in my words/understanding, seem to be: 1. Accidental over use of inert, and/or accidental escaping of it, due to the fact that it's not tied to anything visual. Alice made a suggestion as to how this could be mitigated, but I don't think it has been taken up. 2. Whether there's a risk that web developers might think, based on the carousel case, that they have to make inert all the things on the page that aren't currently visible, which would, I think, also stop them from being focusable. A couple of key background pieces on this: As well as the TAG review thread for CSS inert, linked above, which contains Alice's comment (that in turn links to Alice's detailed write-up <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/11178#discussion_r1845716939>), there's another thread in which CSS WG debated this, which may be of help: <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/10711>. I'm looking through these, but would appreciate if any of you could chime in on this on the call on Wednesday, or via this email thread if you can't make it. Thanks for your time and consideration. Best regards, Matthew Matthew Atkinson Head of Web Standards Samsung R&D Institute UK Samsung Electronics +44 7733 238 020 Samsung R&D Institute (SRUK), Communications House, South Street, Staines-upon-Thames, Surrey, TW18 4QE. A division of Samsung Electronics (UK) Limited, a limited company registered in England and Wales with registered number 03086621 and whose registered address is Samsung House, 2000 Hillswood Drive, Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 0RS, UK. This email (including any attachments) is private and confidential, and may be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this email in error, please inform the sender immediately and then delete this email. Unless you have been given specific permission to do so, please do not distribute or copy this email or its contents. Unless the text of this email specifically states that it is a contractual offer or acceptance, the sender does not intend to create a legal relationship and this email shall not constitute an offer or acceptance which could give rise to a contract. Any views expressed in this communication are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Samsung.
Received on Monday, 10 March 2025 19:44:49 UTC