- From: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 10:51:11 -0500
- To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
- Cc: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, 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>
- Message-Id: <67E0C14C-D86E-4988-BCA4-4C6EF688D996@gmail.com>
Well it is used by the most pervasive apps on the planet using IA2 already. Chrome, FF, and eclipse-based apps. Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 25, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com> wrote: > > I definitely agree that IA2 needs a flexible mechanism to expose roles, I'm just not sure it should be xml-roles object attribute. > >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com> wrote: >> Alex, those object attributes should have been included in IA2 a long time ago. I in no way see these as a hack. Eclipse uses them too. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Aug 25, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> 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 15:51:58 UTC