- From: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 22:25:18 +0100
- To: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
- Cc: "wai-xtech@w3.org" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Link: https://www.w3.org/2017/01/24-aapi-minutes.html Plain text follows: [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference 24 Jan 2017 See also: [2]IRC log [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/01/24-aapi-irc Attendees Present Joanmarie_Diggs, Joseph_Scheuhammer, Rich_Schwerdtfeger Regrets Chair Joseph_Scheuhammer Scribe joanie Contents * [3]Topics 1. [4](All) update on AX API GH-ISSUEs 2. [5]GH-ISSUE-513: (All) Mapping of role="region" when it doesn't have an accessible name. 3. [6](All) update on AX API GH-ISSUEs * [7]Summary of Action Items * [8]Summary of Resolutions __________________________________________________________ <scribe> agenda: this <joanie> scribe: joanie (All) update on AX API GH-ISSUEs <clown> [9]https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/513 [9] https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/513 <clown> [10]https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/513#issuecomment-2738177 49 [10] https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/513#issuecomment-273817749 JS: Joanie raised this issue against Core AAM. ... It's about role region when it doesn't have a label. ... In that case, it shouldn't be treated as a landmark. RS: That's true. JS: But the Core AAM doesn't handle that. RS: It should. JS: Agreed. See the comment in the URL above. ... I've since opened an issue against HTML AAM. ... So that they treat regions without labels as if they were divs. RS: I thought they fixed that. JS: What they did is left it up to screen readers to do this check and filter. <clown> [11]https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/79 [11] https://github.com/w3c/html-aam/issues/79 RS: Maybe because of JAWS. I think JAWS has such a check. JS: The URL above is for the issue I filed. ... I also mentioned you (Rich). JD: Regarding Rich's comment that JAWS's check was why HTML AAM took this approach: You are correct, JAWS's check was explicitly cited by Steve in rswponse to my comment. JS: So what I'll put in the Core AAM is to map ARIA role region to the native host language semantic if there is no accessible name. ... And section without an explicit role as github issue 79. ... Where do we put the action for the test item? RS: I have been working on writing test cases. <clown> [12]https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Testable_Statements#region [12] https://www.w3.org/wiki/ARIA_1.1_Testable_Statements#region JD: Since this is Core AAM and not the ARIA spec itself, should we put these sorts of tests in a separate area or otherwise make it clearly marked? RS: I'll make a special section for it on the wiki (URL above). ... If you look at the harness page now, there's a special section for Core AAM. <clown> [13]https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/514 [13] https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/514 <clown> [14]https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#r ole-map-form [14] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#role-map-form JS: There is someone from TPG (Matthew) who has opened the above issue for the similar case with forms. <clown> "IA2_ROLE_FORM + object attribute xml-roles:form" <clown> ATK: ROLE_LANDMARK + object attribute xml-roles:form <clown> [15]https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#r ole-map-form [15] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#role-map-form JD: So clarification: The above text from Joseph is in the case of role="form" regardless of whether there is a name or not? JS: Yes. JD: So this really is just a different flavor of the region without a name situation? JS: Yes. ... Do we want to solve it now? <clown> scribenick: clown JD: so, a region with a name is a landmark, but a region without a name is not.. RS: There's a reason for that because people were making regions as if they were navigable chunks. JD: I don't understand what is different about a form. RS: It's different because there is structured data associated with a form that get submitted. ... that is not true of a region. JD: There were cases where forms were badly used, say when the entire page is a form. RS: So? You could be the entire landmark on the entire page, and be done. ... Also, you could give a name to the form, and it would still be bad. JD: Even if we don't fix this in the Core-AAM, it should be addressed in the HTML-AAM JS: Matthew has opened such an issue against the HTML-AAM RS: I don't agree with Matthew here. JD: I do agree with him with respect to the <form> element. ... If there are a lot of nameless <section> elements, orca says, "region, region, region, …." ... I've added a hack to take care of this for <section>, and I think I would do the same for <form> RS: If we are talking about a form, then you still want to indicate that it is a form. It has special functionality that needs to be communicate. <joanie> scribe: joanie <clown> JS: BTW, in the the core-aam mappings its only UIA and ATK/AT-SPI that maps role form to landmark. JS: So the only ones we really have to worry about is UIA and ATK. RS: For? JS: The form role. ... How do you know you're in a form in AXAPI? JD: Maybe there's a subrole? JS: Not mentioned in the Core AAM, but there might be one. RS: We should be able to check. JS: Let me try. JD: Should we open an issue against Core AAM to verify the AXAPI subrole, etc.? JS: We have tests for that, but I may look into it more. ... What should we do about form for ATK? JD: I'm fine with either, but I want the mappings to reflect what the expected screen reader (i.e. Orca) behavior is. ... If Orca should treat it as a landmark, expose it as ROLE_LANDMARK. GH-ISSUE-513: (All) Mapping of role="region" when it doesn't have an accessible name. (All) update on AX API GH-ISSUEs JS: There were a bunch of AXAPI issues. ... We went though many of them last time. ... The decision was to do the rest via testing to reveal the answer. <clown> [16]https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/459 [16] https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/459 <clown> [17]https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/f4c807710bf1131aa3f460b0 719e3aa996dc0f3d [17] https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/f4c807710bf1131aa3f460b0719e3aa996dc0f3d JS: Also, since Joanie has to do the WebKitGtk implementation anyway, she might be able to implement anything which is not yet implemented for Safari. ... I have closed issue 459. <clown> [18]https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/464 [18] https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/464 JS: I have also closed issue 464 (related to aria-roledescription with an empty string) ... This condition is not explicitly mapped, other than as an author error. ... This will also be revealed through testing. ... Any thoughts on any of that? RS: I don't think they wanted to see it mapped. ... Matt and Joanie were very clear about that. ... I think Bryan felt the same way as well. <clown> <div aria-roledescription="button"> RS: I understand their reasoning, and since I don't live with it every day, I'll defer to them. JS: Is the above valid as a test case? JD: But I thought you said issue 464 was about a roledescription value that was an empty string. JS: Ah, so this is another concern mentioned by James in this issue. RS: I can see James' point. ... And the assumption is that we will have one-to-one correspondence between native elements and ARIA roles. <clown> [19]https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-role description [19] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-roledescription RS: We don't yet have that. This is one of the main reasons we're planning on an ARIA 1.2. <clown> "The element to which aria-roledescription is applied does not have a valid WAI-ARIA role or does not have an implicit WAI-ARIA role semantic." JS: The above (from the spec) indicates that the meter element without a role specified cannot use aria-roledescription. <clown> [20]https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163647 [20] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163647 JD: I agree with James' suggestion that the concern is things like <div aria-roledescription="button">. ... Because the above maps to ROLE_SECTION, so Orca has no way of knowing it's a button. ... In the case of the meter element, I know it's ROLE_LEVEL_BAR, and thus don't need an explicit or implicit ARIA role. ... If we weren't in CR, I'd want to make the modification to the spec to make the restriction apply to just generic elements (as James suggested). RS: Agreed. But we're in CR. We can mark it at risk. ... Do we want to mark it at risk? JS: No. ... I want a test case. ... Do you really think we'll not have enough implementations? ... I don't think Safari will implement this restriction; but what about Chrome and Firefox? ... Unless we believe they won't either, I think it's premature to mark this as at-risk. ... I'll test this in Firefox, at least. JD: Test nightly. ... We won't know, however, if the exposure (e.g. via object attribute) is the result of refusal to implement, or the result of the default expose-everything via object attribute. Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions [End of minutes
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2017 21:26:01 UTC