- From: Ann Abbott <aabbott@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:44:50 -0600
- To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Cc: "Gunderson, Jon R" <jongund@illinois.edu>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <201603072045.u27Kj2kN021371@d01av04.pok.ibm.com>
+1
Kind Regards, “It always seems impossible until it's
done.”
Ann Abbott
IBM Enterprise Social Solutions Accessibility Lead
Member: International Association of Accessibility ― Nelson Mandela
Professionals (IAAP)
18 July 1918 – 5 December 2013
IBM Social Business logo
Tieline 363-5002
Direct 512-286-5002
aabbott@us.ibm.com
From: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
To: "Gunderson, Jon R" <jongund@illinois.edu>, ARIA Working Group
<public-aria@w3.org>
Date: 03/07/2016 02:09 PM
Subject: RE: Updated combobox examples for APG
Sorry I missed this email earlier, I'm glad Matt fielded the question
during the meeting.
I've been aware of the APG versus spec disconnect for a long time, and this
has caused many problems over the years, because the APG advises something
that actually has no accessibility API support according to the spec, which
leads to the proliferation of inaccessible widgets through misinformation.
Just to clarify this for everybody, neither the original APG nor the new
one is normative, and there is no requirement that developers are required
as a MUST to do what it says.
The spec however is a normative document, and developers are required to
follow the guidance documented there to ensure the correct role and
supporting attribute usages in order to guarantee that it synchronizes
properly with the UAIG so that user agents can correctly reflect these
roles in the accessibility tree.
So as we work on APG 1.1, in all design pattern cases it is vitally
important that we make absolutely certain that the guidance in the APG
specifically reflects what is documented in the ARIA 1.1 specification,
because this will directly map into the accessibility APIs.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gunderson, Jon R [mailto:jongund@illinois.edu]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 9:34 AM
To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; ARIA Working Group
<public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Updated combobox examples for APG
Bryan,
It looks like there is a disconnect between the authoring practices and the
ARIA spec.
So maybe we can discuss briefly on the call today.
I can update the examples to put combobox on the INPUT element that is
defined in the ARIA spec
The authoring practices guide uses the word container with the INPUT
element as the first child element.
So the ARIA 1.1 specs says one thing and the ARIA Authoring Practices 1.1
say another.
ARIA Authoring Practices:
http://w3c.github.io/aria/practices/aria-practices.html#combobox
ARIA Spec:
http://w3c.github.io/aria/aria/aria.html#combobox
Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 9:55 AM
To: Gunderson, Jon R <jongund@illinois.edu>; ARIA Working Group
<public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Updated combobox examples for APG
I understand your point about having alternative examples, but the problem
I'm having is that the word 'support' is a relative and entirely subjective
statement.
So when you say it is supported in Firefox, that isn't because the
accessibility APIs support this markup structure, because the authoring
spec has been saying the opposite for many years.
https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#combobox
The normative authoring spec is quite explicit about how to construct a
combobox, and if done as the spec says, it results in a very accessible
combobox that is supported across all of the accessibility APIs today.
So I do think it is very dangerous to mix alternative markup examples into
the APG that can be proven are not accessible, because developers will
never know which are which, and these examples are going to be around for
many years and be plaguing us for years to come with bad markup
combinations.
This is why I think we need to be careful not to include alternative
examples in the APG that have not yet achieved consensus, because
developers are going to start using these materials long before
accessibility APIs can catch up with these alternative structures that go
against what the 1.0 spec actually says developers should be doing.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gunderson, Jon R [mailto:jongund@illinois.edu]
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 9:12 AM
To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; ARIA Working Group
<public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Updated combobox examples for APG
Bryan,
I think we can have examples in the APG that represent the alternatives,
and when things are finalized we delete the examples that don¹t implement
the specification.
This is especially useful for people who are not as familiar with the
issue, seeing alternatives in code helps people not tracking the issues as
closely.
These examples do work in other browsers like Firefox with JAWS and NVDA,
so common examples are important for people can use to test and understand
the issues.
We can make additional examples putting combobox on the input element.
Jon
On 3/4/16, 7:37 PM, "Bryan Garaventa" <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
wrote:
>Hi,
>In testing the markup, focus is bounced out of the combobox when using
>JAWS in IE11, and neither is accessible.
>
>The reason is because JAWS doesn't support the use of role="combobox"
>on the parent container of a focusable editable element, so the
>role="combobox" attribute needs to be on the HTML input for this to
>work accessibly, including all associated attributes, which matches the
>spec text in 1.0.
>
>Currently we don't have agreement how or if putting role="combobox" on
>an ancestor element in the markup is supposed to work, so putting this
>in the APG is premature because nothing in the spec says this, so too
>is adding the guidance that the combobox will open a Dialog because
>nothing has been mapped to support this on any platform.
>
>We are scheduled to talk about the ancestor issue next Thursday when
>Cynthia can attend the Caucus call.
>
>I recommend that we not put things in the APG that haven't achieved
>consensus, otherwise we will have an obsolete document before it's even
>finished.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gunderson, Jon R [mailto:jongund@illinois.edu]
>Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 1:23 PM
>To: Gunderson, Jon R <jongund@illinois.edu>; ARIA Working Group
><public-aria@w3.org>
>Subject: RE: Updated combobox examples for APG
>
>Better links:
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x-1.html
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x-2.html
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x-3.html
>
>Jon
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gunderson, Jon R [mailto:jongund@illinois.edu]
>Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 3:21 PM
>To: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
>Subject: Updated combobox examples for APG
>
>We have also updated the combo box examples to use aria-selected and
>created an additional example using aria-activedescendant.
>
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x
>-1.html
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x
>-2.html
>https://rawgit.com/jongund/aria/master/practices/examples/combobox/comb
>obo
>x
>-3.html
>
>
>Please review, test and comment.
>
>Jon
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 7 March 2016 20:45:44 UTC