RE: Conflicting inclusion/exclusion criteria for elements in the accessibility tree (Was: Re: [ARIA] Agenda: March 3, 2016 WAI-ARIA Working Group)

Actually I was referring to the reference that user agents can choose to include all elements with tabindex="-1" in the tab order.

I think that would be a bad road to go down...


-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Scheuhammer [mailto:clown@alum.mit.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 11:24 AM
To: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
Cc: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>; Fred Esch <fesch@us.ibm.com>; ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>; Richard Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Conflicting inclusion/exclusion criteria for elements in the accessibility tree (Was: Re: [ARIA] Agenda: March 3, 2016 WAI-ARIA Working Group)

Bryan, Amelia,

On 2016-03-15 2:10 PM, Bryan Garaventa wrote:
> That would be an authoring error, a bad practice, and a critical accessibility issue for the website designer to fix...

On 2016-03-15 2:10 PM, Amelia Bellamy-Royds wrote:
> In that case, I think the author has written a very broken website.

I take it that in the case I outlined, that aria-hidden is being used poorly?  Or perhaps the combination of aria-hidden/tabindex="-1".  "On the assumption the user can see it ..." and it is actually functional, then marking aria-hidden AND tabindex="-1" is a bad idea.

BTW, all I was doing was using the use case from the HTML spec I cited earlier, where it says ignoring negative tabindex is okay in certain cases.  I didn't see how adding aria-hidden changed that use case.

--
;;;;joseph.

'Die Wahrheit ist Irgendwo da Draußen. Wieder.'
                  - C. Carter -

Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 18:50:33 UTC