- From: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:49:16 -0400
- To: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
- Cc: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>, "Schnabel, Stefan" <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, IA2 List <Accessibility-ia2@lists.linux-foundation.org>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>, Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <CA+epNsey+m=snArtqJLhnwNHTj_r+aQ3SpkiL70fHby374j4zQ@mail.gmail.com>
This is true, however xml-roles is not standard attribute in IA2, it's rather a browser specific hack to expose the semantics, that otherwise was missed. So if the API provides a way to expose an element semantics more fully, then I'd say it's the way to go. Having said that, I'm also concerned about backward-compatibility issue. On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com> wrote: > Sorry for being spammy, but with respect to the loss of semantics: The > type of landmark is still being exposed via object attribute. So I'll > still know if an ATK_ROLE_LANDMARK is a form, or navigation, or .... > > On 08/25/2016 10:24 AM, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > > Hi Alex, all. > > > > I don't recall saying "kill the form role" in ATK. We have no plans to > > deprecate ATK_ROLE_FORM. Instead, I believe I said something along the > > lines of the following: > > > > Q: Should HTML's form element be treated like a landmark for the > > purposes of navigation? > > > > If Yes: Map it to ATK_ROLE_LANDMARK > > If No: Continue mapping it to ATK_ROLE_FORM > > > > --joanie > > > > On 08/25/2016 10:08 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: > >> I don't think Jamie argues that FORM is not a landmark. The point is > >> that FORM is a form and also a landmark. IA2 provides a special FORM > >> role, which is used both for ARIA and HTML currently, and adopted by > >> browsers and screen readers. > >> > >> If we use weaker role for forms, then we loose semantics as Jamie > >> pointed out, and we make a not backward compatible change. All JAWS and > >> other commercial screen reader users will have to buy a new screen > >> reader version. > >> > >> ATK gained this role, because it doesn't have a mechanism to fetch all > >> landmarks on a page other than query it by role. And thus they are ok to > >> sacrifice ATK form role for performance reasons I think. Note, ATK world > >> doesn't have so acute problem of backward compatibility as IA2 has, so > >> they have a larger room for changes. IA2 landmark role is a ATK toll to > >> keep IA2 compatible with, this is a primary reason, if I do understand > >> that right. However I'm not confident too that we should take ATK path > >> and kill a form role too. > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Schnabel, Stefan > >> <stefan.schnabel@sap.com <mailto:stefan.schnabel@sap.com>> wrote: > >> > >> Hi James,____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> currently Jaws treats forms like regions as landmarks, i.e. showing > >> them in its landmarks dialog, too. They do this for reason, page > >> structure is very clearly revealed by this. I consider this as a > >> strong feature and do not like this changed.____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> The logic behind that is the pragmatic thinking that forms are > >> landmark-like, too. And a “navigation” landmark can contain fairly > >> complex content, too, not just a list of links.____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> Best Regards____ > >> > >> Stefan____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> *From:*James Teh [mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org > >> <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org>] > >> *Sent:* Donnerstag, 25. August 2016 00:33 > >> *To:* Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com > >> <mailto:richschwer@gmail.com>> > >> *Cc:* Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com > >> <mailto:surkov.alexander@gmail.com>>; Joseph Scheuhammer > >> <clown@alum.mit.edu <mailto:clown@alum.mit.edu>>; Joanmarie Diggs > >> <jdiggs@igalia.com <mailto:jdiggs@igalia.com>>; IA2 List > >> <Accessibility-ia2@lists.linux-foundation.org > >> <mailto:Accessibility-ia2@lists.linux-foundation.org>>; ARIA > Working > >> Group <public-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-aria@w3.org>>; Steven > >> Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com <mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com > >> > >> *Subject:* Re: [Accessibility-ia2] IA2 Role Landmark____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> 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 > >> <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 <tel:%2B61%207%203149%203306> > >> www.nvaccess.org <http://www.nvaccess.org/> > >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess > >> <http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess> > >> Twitter: @NVAccess > >> SIP: jamie@nvaccess.org <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org > >____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> > >> > >> ____ > >> > >> -- ____ > >> > >> James Teh____ > >> > >> Executive Director, NV Access Limited____ > >> > >> Ph +61 7 3149 3306 <tel:%2B61%207%203149%203306>____ > >> > >> www.nvaccess.org <http://www.nvaccess.org/>____ > >> > >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess > >> <http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess>____ > >> > >> Twitter: @NVAccess____ > >> > >> SIP: jamie@nvaccess.org <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org>____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> > >> > >> ____ > >> > >> -- ____ > >> > >> James Teh____ > >> > >> Executive Director, NV Access Limited____ > >> > >> Ph +61 7 3149 3306 <tel:%2B61%207%203149%203306>____ > >> > >> www.nvaccess.org <http://www.nvaccess.org>____ > >> > >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess < > http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess>____ > >> > >> Twitter: @NVAccess____ > >> > >> SIP: jamie@nvaccess.org <mailto:jamie@nvaccess.org>____ > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Accessibility-ia2 mailing list > > Accessibility-ia2@lists.linuxfoundation.org > > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2 > > > >
Received on Thursday, 25 August 2016 14:49:50 UTC