Re: Ensuring "undefined" means undefined for aria-current

+1

Rich Schwerdtfeger




> On Jul 24, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com> wrote:
> 
> Hey all.
> 
> As I pointed out on the list [1], if aria-current is undefined because
> no value is specified, aria-current is false. But if aria-current is set
> to the value "undefined", aria-current is true. It was never (ever,
> ever) intended for undefined and "undefined" to be opposite values. And
> normally they aren't. We just have an oddball case with aria-current
> because the spec states the following for aria-current:
> 
> "Any value not included in the list of allowed values should be treated
> by assistive technologies as if the value true had been provided."
> 
> It is my proposal that we fix this oversight by making the following change:
> 
> Existing text: "If the attribute is not present or its value is an empty
> string, the default value of false applies and the aria-current state
> MUST NOT be exposed by user agents or assistive technologies."
> 
> Proposed text: "If the attribute is not present or its value is an empty
> string or <code>undefined</code>, the default value of false applies and
> the aria-current state MUST NOT be exposed by user agents or assistive
> technologies."
> 
> I believe the above changes are editorial because surely no one thinks
> the string literal value "undefined" should mean the complete opposite
> of an undefined value. (Right? Right?? <smiles>)
> 
> Feedback encouraged.
> --joanie
> 
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2017Jun/0058.html
>