Re: aria-readonly and plain elements

I think there need to be some changes to aria-readonly in CORE-AAM and
HTML-AAM. The ARIA spec itself is probably fine.

HTML-AAM currently states: "If the element has the contenteditable
attribute and aria-readonly="true", User Agents must expose only the
contenteditable state.".
This doesn't seem right. If an author wants to create their own kind of
readonly textfield using JS, they might use <div contenteditable
role="textbox" aria-readonly="true"> and then use JS to swallow any input.
Why do we specifically disallow this? Also, it is inconsistent with the
ARIA spec.

CORE-AAM readonly="false"
States "Expose IA2_STATE_EDITABLE"
This does not make sense for a lot of the roles that support aria-readonly,
such as a checkbox.
In general it does not make sense to expose IA2_STATE_EDITABLE unless you
also expose the IAccessibleEditableText interface, which you would not do
on something like a gridcell unless it had contenteditable.

CORE-AAM readonly="true":
Small nit: this could mention that on some elements, aria-readonly may only
mapped when there is an ancestor grid (example: rowheader). It probably
doesn't matter a great deal though, if the user agent always maps it for
those roles.

Aaron



On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 3:05 PM Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Aaron this was in since before 1.0 when you also contributed and reviewed.
> It has not changed. If you have readonly true the default must be false.
> That said you know the use cases - grid, treegrid, any control that would
> allow the user to change it's contents like a UI design tool. There have
> also been apps that have implemented their own contenteditable at IBM. That
> said, Caret location is a problem unless you use an OSM. Generally
> speaking, contenteditable sucks if you wanted to something more involved
> like Google docs. I am fairly certain Google docs had not used
> contenteditable as it was not full function enough. They had created
> special apis for communicating the caret position to their screenreader
> Chrome add-on. Also, for the longest time Google had only one editor on
> contenteditable areas and designmode="true".
>
> Cheers,
> Rich
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:32 AM, Aaron Leventhal <aleventhal@google.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Aaron
>