- From: Birkir Gunnarsson <birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 17:31:01 -0400
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: ARIA Admin <public-aria-admin@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
"I do not believe interactive widget vs composite widget is the heart of the issue. For me, the issue is how difficult is it for developers create structures with ARIA markup? For authors sake, I would not like to see a proliferation of roles because the structure content is presentational vs interactive content vs complex widget. Hopefully, an author could use a single recognizable logical role independent of the type of content in the structure. " For me ARIA is primarily for users, not authors. That being said, I am fine with allowing the plus and minus buttons as the only non-presentational elements allowed for role="spinbutton". I am not on board with allowing any other elements. I am not on board allowing non-presentational elements on the option role. This is the same role used for <option> elements, and users, through years of interaction with select / option elemetns, have come to expect them to be presentational. On 6/18/16, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > Sorry I'm a couple days late responding to this. > > Concerns with making "spinbutton" children presentational: > I don't think spinbutton's children should be presentational until there is > a solution for the ARIA's coverage gap wrt operability. As an example, there > is no good way to make custom sliders accessible on touch screen devices > because there is no way to trigger the increment/decrement events other than > through de facto keypress events (this workaround is not sustainable or > recommended for touch screen interfaces). If the WG makes spinbutton's > children presentational, the same problem will apply. Author's are currently > able to make spinbuttons accessible by using descendant stepper buttons that > are individually operable. (Note: The native stepper buttons on macOS and in > WebKit are implemented this way.) > > >> On Jun 9, 2016, at 6:04 PM, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org> wrote: >> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to the Accessible Rich Internet >> Applications (ARIA) Working Group regarding the following resolution of >> the ARIA Working group: >> >> Add editorial note to option, treeitem, and spinbutton roles that their >> "children are presentational" status is provisional >> Background >> This was approved by the participants of the 9 June 2016 teleconference, >> and further context is available in the minutes: >> >> https://www.w3.org/2016/06/09-aria-minutes.html#item02 >> <https://www.w3.org/2016/06/09-aria-minutes.html#item02>Note this >> resolution does not close discussion on the issue of whether these roles >> ultimately should have the children presentational restriction, or whether >> further engineering is needed, and if so in what time frame. This edit >> supports wider review of the topic. >> Action >> This CfC is now open for objection, comment, as well as statements of >> support via email. Silence will be interpreted as support, though messages >> of support are certainly welcome. >> If you object to this proposal, or have comments concerning it, please >> respond by replying on list to this message no later than 23:59 (midnight) >> Boston Time, Wednesday, 15 June 2016. For objections only, please copy the >> main <mailto:aria@w3.org>aria@w3.org <mailto:aria@w3.org> list to allow >> technical discussion of the objection to happen there. >> Process >> This CfC is conducted per the ARIA WG decision policy: >> >> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/decision-policy >> <https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/decision-policy> >> I am issuing this CfC as acting chair, but Rich will record the formal >> ratification if passed. >> Michael >> > > -- Birkir Gunnarsson, CPACC Senior Accessibility Subject Matter Expert | Deque Systems 2121 Cooperative Way, Suite 210 Herndon, VA, 20171 Ph: (919) 607-27 53 Twitter: @birkir_gun
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2016 21:31:31 UTC