W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-aria@w3.org > September 2017

Re: Are there really no (normative) constraints on use and exposure of aria-atomic and aria-relevant ?

From: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 04:45:14 +0000
To: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
CC: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7E2CE8DE-040B-410B-93C8-72F4CF088A35@sap.com>
Hi Joanie,

i think this means they should be used always *together* with aria-live on elements on the base markup and not used "standalone".  Otherwise, what would a button with aria-atomic=true declared only mean? Makes no sense to me. 

The "use" part of the spec could be more clear here.

- Stefan

Sent from my iPad

> On 12. Sep 2017, at 22:44, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com> wrote:
> Hey all.
> According to the ARIA spec, aria-atomic and aria-relevant are each
> supported on "all elements of the base markup." The ARIA spec does state
> that aria-atomic and aria-relevant are associated with live regions.
> However, I don't see any normative statement in the ARIA spec indicating
> that authors should/must not use aria-atomic or aria-relevant if the
> element is not a live region and not inside of a live region. I
> similarly do not see a statement that user agents should/must not expose
> these properties if an author does use them outside of a live region. Is
> this by design?
> The above, combined with the mappings in the Core AAM for aria-relevant
> and aria-atomic, seem to suggest that if these properties are present,
> they should be exposed to ATs even if the properties are used outside of
> a live region. Is that desired?
> --joanie (who hopes she's just missing something obvious)
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2017 04:45:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 13 September 2017 04:45:40 UTC