RE: Specific bug relating to role=dialog and role=document

Thanks, that may not be in role=dialog any longer, but I did notice this within alertdialog. 

I recommend when this is reviewed that role=document be removed, and that we put additional pressure on NVDA to support this better where static content can be browsed as expected without causing confusion by users attempting to use these controls in the wild by restricting the reading mode.

I've been trying to get the folks at NVDA to do this since 2013, but they always say that they are just doing what the spec says and that it's our fault for writing it that way.

I'll need support from others here for this to be better supported by them going forward.



Bryan Garaventa
Accessibility Fellow
SSB BART Group, Inc.
bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
415.624.2709 (o)
www.SSBBartGroup.com


-----Original Message-----
From: James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com] 
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2016 1:37 AM
To: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
Cc: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Specific bug relating to role=dialog and role=document

Bryan,
Can you point to where in the APG this appears? At a quick glance in the dialog patterns I couldn't see any mention of role=document (but then again I am browsing on my phone as I'm on vacation).

I did see a mention in the alert dialog pattern but I also note that we haven't reviewed/edited this in 1.1 yet. 

Regards,
James. 

> On Jul 30, 2016, at 03:08, Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> We should not need role document in all cases. Also, desktops don't treat dialogs like that. 
> 
> If you put an APG practice in conflict with the spec. that is not good. Also, you can always go into virtual cursor mode. 
> 
> The document directive goes too far into conditioning for screen reading. 
> 
> Rich
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jul 29, 2016, at 2:32 PM, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Though I'm not sure which one to file this under, so I'll run through the issue here first.
>> 
>> This has to do with role=dialog and role=alertdialog in the spec, which does not match the guidance in the APG which requires the use of role=document to undo what role=dialog is doing within screen readers such as NVDA by enforcing Applications Mode.
>> 
>> So according to the normative spec, neither role=dialog nor role=alertdialog requires the use of role=document within it for spec and accessibility API compliance.
>> 
>> However within the APG, role=document is documented as a necessary role within these roles in order to ensure arrow key navigation within them.
>> 
>> Personally I think it is somewhat pointless and counterproductive to require the use of ARIA to undo the use of ARIA, because this is indicative of a fundamentally broken structure.
>> 
>> E.G In my testing today, the content within role=dialog even if role=document is included is totally inaccessible in Browse Mode within IE11 on Win7 anyway, so this is already an unreliable structure to use if this browser is required for use by an end user on Windows and they need to use NVDA.
>> 
>> My issue however has to do with either the spec or the APG, but basically the APG is recommending a necessary structure that is not reflected in the spec for these roles.
>> 
>> So which one should it be?
>> 
>> Thanks again,
>> Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> Bryan Garaventa
>> Accessibility Fellow
>> SSB BART Group, Inc.
>> bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
>> 415.624.2709 (o)
>> www.SSBBartGroup.com
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com] 
>> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 12:07 PM
>> To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
>> Cc: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: Where are spec and APG bugs filed now?
>> 
>> I would use github issues for APG. 
>> https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues
>> 
>> 
>> I think github is also the best place for the spec https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 29, 2016, at 20:57, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> I know the bug tracker system has changed, so where should new issues now be filed?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Bryan Garaventa
>>> Accessibility Fellow
>>> SSB BART Group, Inc.
>>> bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
>>> 415.624.2709 (o)
>>> www.SSBBartGroup.com
>

Received on Monday, 1 August 2016 17:40:45 UTC