If the only exception in the HTML docs (for a user agent adding an element with negative tabindex into the tab order) is accessibility-related, are we allowed to add an accessibility-related clarification? (Maybe in HTML-AAM?) If something has negative tabindex *and* aria-hidden="true", it should definitely not be in the tab order! Either way, Core AAM should refer to the general situation (is the element in the tab order), and the host languages deal with how the element gets there (or not). For example, when modal dialogs in HTML 5.1 ship, whole branches of the DOM will be excluded from the tab order depending on the modal state. On 15 March 2016 at 10:40, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > Hi Amelia, > > On 2016-03-15 10:51 AM, Amelia Bellamy-Royds wrote: > >> A negative tabindex value will always make an element "focusable but not >> in the current tab order", regardless of whether or not it is normally >> focusable by default. >> > > Apparently, it's not that simple*. The HTML documentation for negative > tabindex says that it "... should not allow the element be reached using > sequential focus navigation". Note that it's a "should not" and not a > "must not". In subsequent note, it gives an example of a keyboard only > user, and states that if the sequential navigation is the only way the user > can move focus to the element then the "... user agent would be well > justified in allowing the user to tab to the control regardless" [1]. > > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/editing.html#negative-tabindex > > * - me pining for simplicity. > > > -- > ;;;;joseph. > > 'Die Wahrheit ist Irgendwo da Draußen. Wieder.' > - C. Carter - > >
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 17:53:18 UTC