RE: treeview questions

I'm not sure, I haven't been able to locate an MS statement about ARIA support levels in IE11, but as far as screen reader support such as with JAWS, support is quite good in IE11 even if the browser accessibility tree rendering in IE11 is pretty horrible. This is primarily the result of DOM processing in JAWS though, because there are not going to be any further accessibility tree updates by Microsoft in IE11 going forward.

At present according to the most recent screen reader demographic statistics, JAWS and IE11 are still the majority combination in use on desktops today. It's sort of a catch twenty two, because even in Windows10 MS is saying that screen reader users should use IE11 because Edge cannot be used accessibly.

Bryan Garaventa
Accessibility Fellow
SSB BART Group, Inc.
bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
415.624.2709 (o)
www.SSBBartGroup.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Gunderson, Jon R [mailto:jongund@illinois.edu] 
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2017 4:55 PM
To: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>; Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; 'ARIA Working Group' <public-aria@w3.org>
Subject: Re: treeview questions

Matt and Bryan,

What is the browser support requirement for ARIA examples?

Does Internet Explorer 11 claim to implement ARIA 1.0?

Jon


On 2/18/17, 12:15 AM, "Matt King" <a11ythinker@gmail.com> wrote:

    Bryan, I posted to WAI-IG.
    
    We do not have a regular cadence for heartbeat publications. We targeted Feb
    13 for one, but we obviously missed that. We will set a new date at the
    March 6 meeting. 
    
    In the mean time, you can contribute by reviewing the work that we believe
    is ready to be included in the next heartbeat publication. You can find that
    work by looking at the issues labeled "needs review" that are in the "Jan
    2017 Cleanup" milestone. This query pulls them up:
    https://github.com/w3c/aria-practices/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+mileston

    e%3A%22Jan+2017+Clean+Up%22+sort%3Aupdated-desc+label%3A%22Needs+Review%22
    
    Matt
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com] 
    Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 9:44 PM
    To: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>; 'ARIA Working Group'
    <public-aria@w3.org>
    Subject: RE: treeview questions
    
    Thanks,
    I'll pass this along.
    
    How often is the draft content pulled into the primary site?
    
    
    
    Bryan Garaventa
    Accessibility Fellow
    SSB BART Group, Inc.
    bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
    415.624.2709 (o)
    www.SSBBartGroup.com
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Matt King [mailto:a11ythinker@gmail.com] 
    Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 6:12 PM
    To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; 'ARIA Working Group'
    <public-aria@w3.org>
    Subject: RE: treeview questions
    
    Bryan,
    
    Review of tree view examples is open, so please provide your feedback in the
    treeview issue. Even after we have completed the review process for an
    example, it is best to provide example feedback in a github issue.
    
    Note that several updates have been made to the treeview examples since we
    published on December 14. It appears to me that the problems in IE 11 have
    all been resolved. I tested with NVDA in FF, Chrome, and IE 11. The only
    issue I saw is some extra verbosity in IE 11 when NVDA incorrectly reads
    every item in a group after the focus moves inside the group.
    
    When responding to people inquiring about issues like the one Rich raised,
    it is very helpful to test against master and then point people to the
    editor's draft on github if the issue has been resolved.
    
    Matt
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 4:27 PM
    To: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
    Subject: FW: treeview questions
    
    Hi,
    As an FYI, it looks like most of the ARIA Tree examples linked to from the
    APG 1.1 page are broken in IE11.
    
    I understand not wanting to support outdated browsers, however there is a
    difference between using standards compliant markup and using cross-browser
    scripting, which we must make sure we always use regardless what the markup
    is. Otherwise it makes it look like the APG widgets are not reliable.
    
    
    Bryan Garaventa
    Accessibility Fellow
    SSB BART Group, Inc.
    bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
    415.624.2709 (o)
    www.SSBBartGroup.com
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 4:14 PM
    To: Rich Morin <rdm@cfcl.com>; WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
    Cc: Amanda Lacy <lacy925@gmail.com>
    Subject: RE: treeview questions
    
    Hello,
    ARIA Tree constructs have been well supported for years going back to ARIA
    1.0 when properly constructed. I don't believe we have had a chance to
    complete the guidance in the APG 1.1 Tree widget as yet however.
    
    Can you please test the following implementation instead?
    http://whatsock.com/tsg/Coding%20Arena/ARIA%20Trees/Tree%20(External%20XML)/
    demo.htm 
    
    Just verified using JAWS 12 through 18 in IE11, Firefox, and Chrome Canary,
    plus NVDA in Firefox. (Works best in FF due to better accessibility tree and
    integrated screen reader support within these browser/AT combinations.)
    
    To see how this works, you can download the code for this, powered by
    jQuery, within the accessible widget archive at https://github.com/accdc/tsg

    
    
    You can also use Visual ARIA to examine the ARIA roles and supporting
    attributes that are being used and compare these with the one you have
    referenced earlier to see how they differ.
    http://whatsock.com/training/matrices/visual-aria.htm 
    
    
    
    Bryan Garaventa
    Accessibility Fellow
    SSB BART Group, Inc.
    bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com
    415.624.2709 (o)
    www.SSBBartGroup.com
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Rich Morin [mailto:rdm@cfcl.com]
    Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 2:31 PM
    To: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
    Cc: Amanda Lacy <lacy925@gmail.com>
    Subject: treeview questions
    
    I'm interested in finding a highly accessible treeview implementation to
    adopt for my code.  So, I was quite interested to find that the "WAI-ARIA
    Authoring Practices 1.1" has several examples I could try out and borrow
    from.
    
    However, the examples worked very poorly for Amanda Lacy, when she tried
    using them with NVDA.  The entries I could see on the screen didn't appear
    for her and the suggested keyboard interactions didn't work.  Could someone
    give this a try and let us know if we're simply missing something?
    
    More generally, I gather that declared properties may work better than
    computed properties with some software, though they clearly increase the
    size of the HTML payload.  In my case, compatibility is a much bigger issue
    than payload size, so I've been planning to use declared properties.  Are
    there other considerations I should take into account?
    
    -r
    
    Links:
    
    - WAI-ARIA Authoring Practices 1.1
      https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/#TreeView

    
    - File Directory Treeview Example Using Computed Properties
     
    https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/examples/treeview/treeview-1/tr

    eeview-1a.html
    
    - File Directory Treeview Example Using Declared Properties
     
    https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/examples/treeview/treeview-1/tr

    eeview-1b.html
    
    - Navigation Treeview Example Using Computed Properties
     
    https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/examples/treeview/treeview-2/tr

    eeview-2a.html
    
    - Navigation Treeview Example Using Declared Properties
     
    https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/examples/treeview/treeview-2/tr

    eeview-2b.html
    
     -- 
    http://www.cfcl.com/rdm           Rich Morin           rdm@cfcl.com
    http://www.cfcl.com/rdm/resume    San Bruno, CA, USA   +1 650-873-7841
    
    Software system design, development, and documentation

Received on Monday, 20 February 2017 01:10:18 UTC