RE: Significant ambiguities in aria-roledescription

I have to agree, that's going to be misused everywhere.


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

-----Original Message-----
From: Léonie Watson [mailto:tink@tink.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 8:32 AM
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

On 07/07/2016 16:01, Schnabel, Stefan wrote:
> 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.


The warning is in the note included after the definition. Here's the text:

"Users of
assistive technologies
  learn interaction patterns based on localized role descriptions such as "button" or "slider." When authors change the role description, users may no longer understand the purpose of the control or how to interact with it. Thus custom role descriptions are only recommended for use on non-interactive container roles like group
  or
region
  or to provide a more specific description of a widget."


Léonie.


--
@LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem

Received on Thursday, 7 July 2016 15:41:40 UTC