- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 15:26:05 -0700
- To: Fred Esch <fesch@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <CAFDDJ7xCPHPScgv902jcaOkRevCnS_77fFspKnZSGv8hs7Vf+g@mail.gmail.com>
It's not quite as simple as you like, Fred, but I think we can break it down to a 2-step requirement. To remove an entire sub-branch of content from the accessibility tree, you need to: - Hide it, using native language mechanisms, CSS, or aria-hidden="true" - Ensure it cannot receive user focus. Note that if you "hide" the element in a way such that it is not rendered (e.g., CSS display: none), it will also not receive focus. To exclude structural mark-up from the accessibility tree because it has no semantic meaning (while still allowing child content to be processed), you need to: - Give it a role of presentation/none if it does not default to that role based on native language semantics - Ensure it cannot receive user focus ____________________________ The inconsistent implementation of aria-hidden="false" is a separate matter. It relates to using the aria property to *reveal* content to ATs that would normally be considered hidden by native language mechanisms or CSS. Based on Bryan Garaventa & Stefan Schnabel's responses on the other thread, there seems to be an expectation that aria-hidden="false" can override "display: none", which I hadn't realized. I hadn't factored that in to my priority list, but the change is straightforward. If there is implementer support for allowing non-rendered content to be represented in the accessibility tree, it might be possible to allow structured content (but not interactive content) in SVG <desc> to be included as browsable nodes in the accessibility tree. We may want to revisit this in the SVG-A11y task force once the Core-AAM issues are settled. It looks like the discussion of the core issues will happen at the Tuesday 15 March call of the User Agent Implementation (UAI) Task Force, since that group has responsibility for Core-AAM. I'll try to be on that call. On 9 March 2016 at 08:58, Fred Esch <fesch@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Jumping to Amelia's thread. > > I would appreciate as simple as possible methods to determine whether > something should be included in the accessibility tree or not. Bryan and > Stefan bring up complications with aria-hidden and CSS display:none, Joseph > points brings up events as forcing inclusion in the accessibility tree. The > Note in ARIA 1.1 is disturbing "At the time of this writing, *aria-hidden* > <https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-hidden>="false" is known to > work inconsistently in browsers. As future implementations improve, use > caution and test thoroughly before relying on this approach." > > We have too complicated a system. How can we give authors guidance if even > browsers can't agree on what the behavior is. > >
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2016 22:26:33 UTC