- From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 13:18:56 -0400
- To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
- Cc: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>, Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>, "public-aria@w3.org" <public-aria@w3.org>
OK, distinguishing aria-describedby text by a delay or a different pitch is conveying visual presentation via another method and is an accessibility matter. But the delay should be user configurable. And unless one is using a static page or an application that seldom has any changes / updates made a user will be taking great risk in choosing to turn off some authored-content that has a particular kind of markup. BTW as a user, I do not review how content is marked up in terms of attributes, properties etc. ... I am focussed on consuming the information or performing a task on the page so long as it works with AT. But maybe I am in the minority as users go. Perhaps one should re-read the messages above if one cannot discern the risks or visualize the impracticality of the assumptions made. With two attributes that essentially do the same thing I am not sure how one can assume that all developers around the world will use them as a few individuals wish. Choosing to ignore risks noted above because it is not practical at this late stage is myopic and does not make the risks dubious. Best regards, Sailesh
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2016 17:19:26 UTC