RE: Regarding aria-details and current support?

Regarding aria-details and aria-describedby, it’s interesting to me how different the public documentation for this already is.

 

According to the spec:

 

“In some user agents, multiple reference relationships for descriptive information are not supported by the accessibility API. In such cases, if both  <https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.2/#aria-describedby> aria-describedby and aria-details are provided on an element, aria-details takes precedence.”

https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.2/#aria-details

 

As opposed to this on MDN:

 

“That said, it is valid for an element to have both aria-details and a description specified with either aria-describedby or aria-description.”

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/ARIA/Attributes/aria-details

 

 

 

 

 

From: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com> 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 12:00 PM
To: Aaron Leventhal <aleventhal@google.com>; Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>
Cc: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>; public-aria-practices@w3.org; Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Regarding aria-details and current support?

 

Yes I’ll file an APG issue. Let’s continue there. 

 

* Stefan

 

From: Aaron Leventhal <aleventhal@google.com <mailto:aleventhal@google.com> > 
Sent: Monday, 16 October 2023 20:58
To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com <mailto:bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com> >
Cc: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com <mailto:stefan.schnabel@sap.com> >; Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com <mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com> >; public-aria-practices@w3.org <mailto:public-aria-practices@w3.org> ; Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group <public-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-aria@w3.org> >
Subject: Re: Regarding aria-details and current support?

 

Stefan, can you give specifics on where the current spec text is unclear? Maybe we should file an issue and keep that discussion separate for now.

 

 

On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 12:32 PM Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com <mailto:bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com> > wrote:

Yes please, aria-roledescription has no connection with aria-description, the first has nothing to do with AccName and the second definitely does. 

 

E.G. The use of ariaroledescription has no impact within the AccName computation for accessible naming or describing, however aria-description will set the Description property in the accessibility tree.

 

From: Aaron Leventhal <aleventhal@google.com <mailto:aleventhal@google.com> > 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 8:54 AM
To: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com <mailto:stefan.schnabel@sap.com> >
Cc: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com <mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com> >; Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com <mailto:bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com> >; public-aria-practices@w3.org <mailto:public-aria-practices@w3.org> ; Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group <public-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-aria@w3.org> >
Subject: Re: Regarding aria-details and current support?

 

>  aria-description is also poor man’s replacement fallback for aria-roledescription 

 

I'm not sure what that sentence means Stefan! Feel free to use it even if you are rich :)

 

We worked pretty hard to update the ARIA spec itself with information on when to use aria-description/describedby, aria-details and aria-roledecription. Stefan, maybe you should review that and see whether there is anything vague or confusing.

 

Aaron

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 11:05 AM Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com <mailto:stefan.schnabel@sap.com> > wrote:

As I understand from previous group discussions, aria-description is also poor man’s replacement fallback for aria-roledescription (which is considered as being evil in many cases). 

 

Therefore it is of interest if aria-description is already supported IN PRACTICE on any role in case role name should be left untouched. 

 

Also APG info and guidance when to take what, of course.

 

* Stefan

 

From: Aaron Leventhal <aleventhal@google.com <mailto:aleventhal@google.com> > 
Sent: Monday, 16 October 2023 16:51
To: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com <mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com> >
Cc: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com <mailto:bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com> >; public-aria-practices@w3.org <mailto:public-aria-practices@w3.org> ; Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group <public-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-aria@w3.org> >
Subject: Re: Regarding aria-details and current support?

 

We also need to look at more test cases for aria-description, now that it's more universal, right?

There are use cases for aria-description to exist on generic containers. Also, it needs to work well in various screen reader modes, and in editing contexts.

 

On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 10:14 PM Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com <mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com> > wrote:

The only thing I know definitively is that We don’t yet have any aria-details test cases or tests written for it in APG and aria-at. Help is wanted.

 

Matt

 

From: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com <mailto:bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com> > 
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2023 8:24 AM
To: public-aria-practices@w3.org <mailto:public-aria-practices@w3.org> ; 'Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group' <public-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-aria@w3.org> >
Subject: Regarding aria-details and current support?

 

Hi,

Does anyone have any public behavior and support information for aria-details and whether it is sufficiently supported by browsers and screen readers as yet?

Thanks,

Bryan