RE: Significant ambiguities in aria-roledescription

Hi Leonie,

>>>The spec recommends using the attribute only on non-interactive containers ...

see http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription


No word about only structural roles in latest draft.

Authors SHOULD only use aria-roledescription on elements that equate to a valid WAI-ARIA role (have an implicit WAI-ARIA role semantic) or have a valid WAI-ARIA role applied.
The spec even says "All elements of the base markup" for applicability.

Best Regards
Stefan

-----Original Message-----
From: Léonie Watson [mailto:tink@tink.uk] 
Sent: Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2016 16:43
To: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>; Richard Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>; White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
Cc: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>; ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Significant ambiguities in aria-roledescription

It may be this is what's meant by ambiguity, but what worries me is the 
potential for confusing or even stopping users from accessing web 
content if this attribute is misused, and the potential for developers 
to misunderstand its purpose and misuse it as well.

The spec recommends using the attribute only on non-interactive 
containers, but doesn't prevent it. For this reason alone I have serious 
misgivings about including this attribute.

It also feels as though this takes a step towards role extensibility - 
or at least gives the impression that arbitrary roles can be presented 
to users where no suitable role exists already. We do need to look at 
extensibility, especially in the context of Web Components, but this 
feels premature.

Léonie.

Received on Thursday, 7 July 2016 15:01:55 UTC