- From: James Teh <jamie@nvaccess.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 08:33:17 +1000
- To: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Cc: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, IA2 List <Accessibility-ia2@lists.linux-foundation.org>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <540187cb-c21a-dc0b-c69b-6a697748c656@nvaccess.org>
Hi Rich, I understand the reason for the use of the landmark role for role="form". However, I disagree with the HTML form element being mapped to the landmark role because semantics are lost. The fact that something is a form has more semantic value than just being a landmark. Still, if the spec already requires this, I guess we have little choice but to comply at this stage. Jamie On 25/08/2016 3:08 AM, Rich Schwerdtfeger wrote: > Jamie, > > The point is we want ALL the landmarks to be treated the same way for > ATVs. So, first we determine that it is a landmark. Then we go to > xml-roles to determine the type of landmark. > > Otherwise, we need a special case for a form. That is what we are > trying to avoid. For these reasons ATK/ATSPI created a landmark role > first. > > The HTML the form element now uses the ARIA mappings for the form > role. See "Use WAI-ARIA mapping” under the form element. This is for > all platforms. > > https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/html-aam/html-aam.html > > We do understand that non-browser applications may still use the older > Form role mapping as would older browser versions. It is for these > reasons that our definition of deprecation is that it has not gone a > way but rather it is going to this new preferred mapping. > > Best, > > Rich > > > > Rich Schwerdtfeger > > > > >> On Aug 23, 2016, at 7:35 PM, James Teh <jamie@nvaccess.org >> <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org>> wrote: >> >> If you believe that role="form" has no semantic value other than >> being a landmark, then let's go ahead and map it to >> IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK. On the other hand, the HTML form tag *does* have >> semantic value other than being a landmark, so I'd argue it should be >> IA2_ROLE_FORM. >> >> >> On 24/08/2016 5:22 AM, Rich Schwerdtfeger wrote: >>> We are not asking that IA2_ROLE_FORM be deprecated altogether. Even >>> with ARIA we have some attributes that re deprecated but that is >>> meant so that there will be a replacement solution. An example is >>> the drag and drop aria properties. For ARIA browser conformance >>> testing to exit Candidate Recommendation we will be testing for >>> IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK on form roles. >>> >>> Rich Schwerdtfeger >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 18, 2016, at 9:56 PM, James Teh <jamie@nvaccess.org >>>> <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 11/08/2016 2:58 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: >>>>> 1) adding IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK and >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>>> 2) deprecating IA2_ROLE_FORM? >>>> I'd argue that there is more semantic value in a "form" than just >>>> the fact that it is a landmark. This probably doesn't apply to ARIA >>>> (at least for now), since role="form" is defined as only a >>>> landmark. However, I'd argue it does apply to the HTML form tag. >>>> So, I'm fine t not use IA2_ROLE_FORM for ARIA role="form", but I'm >>>> dubious about deprecating it altogether, including for the HTML >>>> form tag. >>>> Jamie >>>> >>>> -- >>>> James Teh >>>> Executive Director, NV Access Limited >>>> Ph +61 7 3149 3306 >>>> www.nvaccess.org <http://www.nvaccess.org/> >>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess >>>> Twitter: @NVAccess >>>> SIP: jamie@nvaccess.org >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> James Teh >> Executive Director, NV Access Limited >> Ph +61 7 3149 3306 >> www.nvaccess.org >> Facebook:http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess >> Twitter: @NVAccess >> SIP:jamie@nvaccess.org > -- James Teh Executive Director, NV Access Limited Ph +61 7 3149 3306 www.nvaccess.org Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess Twitter: @NVAccess SIP: jamie@nvaccess.org
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2016 22:34:17 UTC