Re: Action 2044

Adding to todays agenda.

                                                              
     Regards,                                                 
                                                              
    Fred Esch                                                 
 Watson, IBM, W3C                                             
  Accessibility                                               
                                                              
 IBM Watson       Watson Release Management and Quality       
                                                              






From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
To: Rich Schwerdtfeger <schwer@yahoo.com>
Cc: Fred Esch/Arlington/IBM@IBMUS, Joseph Scheuhammer
            <clown@alum.mit.edu>, ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>,
            SVG-A11y TF <public-svg-a11y@w3.org>
Date: 05/03/2016 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: Action 2044



PS, anyone following along on the mailing list may also want to read the
discussion that has been made via line-comments in the GitHub commit
record:
https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/f53ed80e314bb0437a1e1c152b902246b8099214


On 3 May 2016 at 20:14, Amelia Bellamy-Royds <
amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com> wrote:
  Some general comments:

  1)
  I don't like calling this "Overriding Presentational Roles".  That
  suggests that presentational roles are there by default and the author is
  intentionally over-riding them.  That's not what we're describing: we're
  describing cases where an author-supplied role of presentation/none is
  invalid and ignored.

  I would change the heading to something like "Conflicts with Other
  Element Semantics" or "Incompatible Use of Presentational Roles".  The
  first paragraph could then be something like:

  "The presentational roles only neutralize implicit semantics from the
  host language. There are a number of ways in which author-supplied
  semantics, including other WAI-ARIA attributes, can cause an explicit or
  inherited presentational role to be invalid and therefore ignored."


  2)
  I would still prefer that this be a stand-alone section, rather than
  tucked into the description of the presentation role.  The section is
  long enough.  It may now have a link-able ID, but it doesn't show up in
  the table of contents.

  It seems to me it is more equivalent to the section on conflicts with
  host language semantics, although in this case we are also discussing
  conflicts between different types of ARIA semantics.


  3)
  Does this section also apply to elements that are presentational because
  of an ancestor with a "children are presentational" role? If so, it
  should be clearly stated.  If not, we need rules elsewhere for what to do
  if there are interactive elements as a child of a button, img, or similar
  role.


  4)
  Does this section also apply to elements that are presentational because
  of host native semantics (e.g., a <span>)? What role gets applied if
  global ARIA attributes or interactivity force such an element to be
  included?


  On 26 April 2016 at 14:59, Rich Schwerdtfeger <schwer@yahoo.com> wrote:
   I modified the role=“presentation” section to separate out the
   overriding of role “presentation” so that it may be referenced by the
   SVG and Core AAMs:

   https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action2044/aria/aria.html#override_presentation_none



   Let me know if you have any issues.

   Rich

   Rich Schwerdtfeger
   Round Rock, TX