W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-aria@w3.org > March 2016

Re: Alternative APG landmarks draft

From: Gunderson, Jon R <jongund@illinois.edu>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:21:17 +0000
To: "tink@tink.uk" <tink@tink.uk>, "public-aria@w3.org" <public-aria@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D2FB0D32.51837%jongund@illinois.edu>
Léonie,


Thank you for your proposal.
I like the idea of linking to one of the HTML5 documents describing how
ARIA is used in HTML5:
https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/
https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/

We should link to one or both, it seems html-aria is more author centered
than the mapping link.

My main problem with your proposal is that the landmark roles themselves
would not be part of the table of contents, this is different than the
widget roles which are in the TOC for the document.  Landmarks are
important and I think that being in the TOC gives them the same level of
importance in the document as widget roles.

The proposal that Anne, Teresa and I put together tries to emulate the
format of the widget roles for consistency of the document.
I don¹t know if that is important to the working group or not for
landmarks.

Jon



On 2/29/16, 5:12 PM, "Léonie Watson" <tink@tink.uk> wrote:

>Well, here goes...
>
>Attached (assuming the listserve doesn't strip it out) is an alternative
>draft of the APG landmarks info.
>
>I've tried to simplify the language as much as possible, to focus on ARIA
>landmarks first and their relationship to HTML second, and to include
>examples/placeholders for examples to illustrate certain points.
>
>It's all terribly subjective of course... so feel free to criticize away
>:)
>
>
>Léonie.
>
>
>-- 
>@LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem.
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2016 15:21:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:58:22 UTC