Re: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec

 > Besides this list of elements then, all other HTML5 elements have ARIA
role usage constraints?

no. I provided you with examples. please refer to the table in the ARIA in
HTML spec for the full listing of elements and their associated ARIA usage
rules.

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>

On 17 March 2018 at 16:02, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
wrote:

> “Not to every element, only for those that are considered to have strong
> native semantics. Some elements for example div, span, em, strong, small,
> s, cite,
>
> q, dfn, abbr, time, code, var, samp, kbd, sub and sup, i, b, u, mark,
> ruby, rt, rp, bdi, bdo, br, wbr
>
> have no constraints.”
>
>
>
> Besides this list of elements then, all other HTML5 elements have ARIA
> role usage constraints?
>
>
>
>
>
> Bryan Garaventa
>
> Accessibility Fellow
>
> Level Access, Inc.
>
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
>
> 415.624.2709 (o)
>
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 17, 2018 1:51 AM
>
> *To:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
> *Cc:* Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>; W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>;
> Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
>
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> > Do I understand correctly then, that you are applying the following ARIA
> 1.1 statement to all of the HTML5 elements?
>
> Not to every element, only for those that are considered to have strong
> native semantics. Some elements for example div, span, em, strong, small,
> s, cite, q, dfn, abbr, time, code, var, samp, kbd, sub and sup, i, b, u,
> mark, ruby, rt, rp, bdi, bdo, br, wbr
>
> have no constraints.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
>
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
>
>
> On 17 March 2018 at 04:39, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.
> com> wrote:
>
> Thanks, the depths of my own ignorance astonishes me too at times.
>
>
>
> Do I understand correctly then, that you are applying the following ARIA
> 1.1 statement to all of the HTML5 elements?
>
>
>
> “Host languages MAY document features that cannot be overridden with
> WAI-ARIA (these are called "strong native semantics").”
>
>
>
>
>
> Bryan Garaventa
>
> Accessibility Fellow
>
> Level Access, Inc.
>
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
>
> 415.624.2709 (o)
>
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, March 16, 2018 2:28 AM
>
>
> *To:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
> *Cc:* Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>; W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>;
> Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
>
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> >Does this mean that the ARIA 1.1 specification is not actually meant to
> be used to define normative ARIA usage criteria, but that this >is supposed
> to be defined by a different document instead?
>
>
>
> >Where is this defined?
>
> Where it has always been defined. in Section: Conflicts with Host
> Language Semantics
> https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#host_general_conflict
>
> Note this is not about how ARIA features are to be processed in browsers,
> or to be used in combination with each other these are defined in the Core
> AAM and ARIA 1.1. It is about which are features can be used by authors in
> conjunction with features of the host language. This is not a new concept
> or definition, although it appears new to you,  it has been formalised in
> HTML since HTML5 was made a recommendation in 2014. It is also not
> particular to HTML, SVG 2 has a similar set of normative authoring
> requirements for use of ARIA with SVG elements.
> https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG2/struct.html#implicit-aria-semantics.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
>
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
>
>
> On 16 March 2018 at 02:51, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.
> com> wrote:
>
> Okay, now I’m really confused.
>
>
>
> Does this mean that the ARIA 1.1 specification is not actually meant to be
> used to define normative ARIA usage criteria, but that this is supposed to
> be defined by a different document instead?
>
>
>
> Where is this defined?
>
>
>
> *From:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 7:16 PM
> *To:* 'w3c/html-aria' <reply+001c7568bc22899eb274b9cc4b088c
> cd916d25f1be7fc70492cf0000000116c2b9fa92a169ce1234ab95@reply.github.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [w3c/html-aria] Issues from ARIA Working Group review of
> the ARIA HTML spec document (#102)
>
>
>
> “You do understand that it’s impossible to implement validator support for
> ARIA in HTML based simply on the ARIA spec, right?”
>
>
>
> Is this question for me?
>
>
>
> I’m not talking about HTML validation here, but ARIA usage validation.
> These two are not the same as you state.
>
>
>
> From what I gather from this discussion, this ARIA HTML spec appears to be
> stating that the normative rules for correct ARIA usage, are not contained
> within the ARIA 1.1 specification, and that a different spec document is
> responsible for determining this instead. However this determination
> directly contradicts the ARIA 1.1 specification.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Michael[tm] Smith <notifications@github.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 3:47 PM
> *To:* w3c/html-aria <html-aria@noreply.github.com>
> *Cc:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>; Mention <
> mention@noreply.github.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [w3c/html-aria] Issues from ARIA Working Group review of
> the ARIA HTML spec document (#102)
>
>
>
> As a simple example of this, according to the ARIA HTML spec document, no
> ARIA roles are allowed to be used on the HTML label element.
>
> To my knowledge the ARIA spec makes no claim such as this
>
> Right. That’s because by design, the ARIA spec makes no normative claims
> about what roles are allowed HTML elements, nor on elements in any other
> host language — instead it says that’s something which is left up to host
> language specifications to define.
>
> You do understand that it’s impossible to implement validator support for
> ARIA in HTML based simply on the ARIA spec, right?
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102#issuecomment-373547134>, or mute
> the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABx1aBt7cIc7jlYdE2amyleqIpMMTtC-ks5teu96gaJpZM4Srq39>
> .
>
>
>
> Bryan Garaventa
>
> Accessibility Fellow
>
> Level Access, Inc.
>
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
>
> 415.624.2709 (o)
>
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 2:11 PM
> *To:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>; W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>;
> Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> *Subject:* RE: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
>
>
> I’m sorry, but this issue really is a huge one, and this means that the
> HTML Validator cannot be trusted.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 2:08 PM
> *To:* 'w3c/html-aria' <reply+001c7568b35812b610f1587aabadf8
> 87a76ad9e6b8eb94d792cf0000000116c298a892a169ce1234ab95@reply.github.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [w3c/html-aria] Issues from ARIA Working Group review of
> the ARIA HTML spec document (#102)
>
>
>
> Yes, because nothing in the ARIA spec says that developers cannot do so.
> All of the roles I mentioned are simply those that I know of personally,
> but there are countless others not mentioned.
>
>
>
> E.G It is perfectly valid to include role=checkbox on a label element that
> includes a hidden checkbox element so that the simulated checkbox control
> is focusable and interactive and toggles aria-checked while the result of
> this is reflected within the hidden checkbox for form submission.
>
>
>
> There are so many examples of this with various markup structures that, if
> the HTML Validator is going to be flagging all such instances as being
> invalid, then the W3C HTML Validator cannot be trusted to provide accurate
> ARIA related information.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* stevefaulkner <notifications@github.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 1:25 PM
> *To:* w3c/html-aria <html-aria@noreply.github.com>
> *Cc:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>; Mention <
> mention@noreply.github.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [w3c/html-aria] Issues from ARIA Working Group review of
> the ARIA HTML spec document (#102)
>
>
>
> >So, if I understand correctly, are you saying that the HTML Validator will
> flag any ARIA role present on a label element as being invalid?
>
> yes, the aim of the conformance requirements is to deter authors from
> misusing HTML elements that have strong semantics or behaviour. Can you
> provide a use case for adding roles to the label element, that could not be
> easily fulfilled using a span?
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
> On 15 March 2018 at 19:30, Bryan Garaventa <notifications@github.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So, if I understand correctly, are you saying that the HTML Validator
> will
> > flag any ARIA role present on a label element as being invalid?
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you commented.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102#issuecomment-373495949>,
> or mute
> > the thread
> > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAzBE5ICQqMyiqku_
> WVd4eWDXC-rHkSHks5tesFAgaJpZM4Srq39>
> > .
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102#issuecomment-373511269>, or mute
> the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABx1aEzeTkBgIE1ymvk1pBGRcxs0W0tmks5tes4ogaJpZM4Srq39>
> .[image: Image removed by sender.]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bryan Garaventa
>
> Accessibility Fellow
>
> Level Access, Inc.
>
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
>
> 415.624.2709 (o)
>
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 11:41 AM
> *To:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
> *Cc:* Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>; W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>;
> Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
>
>
> Hi Bryan,
>
> each of your suggestions will be reviewed and a decision will be made
> based on use cases and data provided.
>
>
>
> As I stated in the issue you filed
> <https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102#issuecomment-373480208>
>
> you wrote:
>
> To my knowledge the ARIA spec makes no claim such as this, so it is
> unclear where these rules are being deduced from.
>
> The ARIA spec naturally does not make any claims about what is allowed
> usage in host languages, what it does say is
>
> Host languages MAY document features that cannot be overridden with
> WAI-ARIA
> https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#host_general_conflict
>
> Which is what ARIA in HTML does for the HTML specification. The rules have
> been developed over the past 8 years.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
>
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
>
>
> On 15 March 2018 at 18:23, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.
> com> wrote:
>
> <reply+001c7568acfc056d811d78e8ce4acfb1444fde85c25ce0b892cf00000001
> 16c1e51b92a169ce1234ab95@reply.github.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [w3c/html-aria] Issues from ARIA Working Group review of
> the ARIA HTML spec document (#102)
>
>
>
> Thanks, I understand, however I don't have time to write a separate markup
> case for every instance of all of these roles. Speaking personally, our
> clients at Level Access have had cases for all of these combinations, and
> all were valid usages of ARIA.
>
>
>
> I wasn't aware until last week that this document is being used as the
> guide for the W3C HTML Validator, and that missing roles will be flagged as
> being invalid usages of ARIA. If this is a misunderstanding on my part,
> please let me know since this is the primary reason for my objection.
>
>
>
> As a simple example of this, according to the ARIA HTML spec document, no
> ARIA roles are allowed to be used on the HTML label element.
>
>
>
> To my knowledge the ARIA spec makes no claim such as this, so it is
> unclear where these rules are being deduced from.
>
>
>
> However, if there is no risk that valid usages of ARIA will be flagged as
> violations by the HTML Validator, then I have no objections to this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bryan Garaventa
>
> Accessibility Fellow
>
> Level Access, Inc.
>
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
>
> 415.624.2709 (o)
>
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2018 1:21 AM
> *To:* Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.com>
> *Cc:* Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>; W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>;
> Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
>
>
> >I don't recommend entering CR until these issues are addressed, because
> there are currently many roles that are missing from the >accepted role
> usage column, and if they are omitted then HTML validators will start
> flagging valid constructs with false reports as >being invalid usages of
> ARIA.
>
>
>
> as I stated on the bug Bryan filed
> <https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102#issuecomment-373287694>
>
>    - The default implicit column mappings are defined in the HTML AAM
>    <https://w3c.github.io/html-aam/>, if you have issue with these you
>    will need to file issues there.
>    - it is not simply enough to state that "the accepted
>    roles/states/properties column is missing". As a host language HTML can and
>    does limit the allowed roles on elements with meaningful default semantics.
>    If it is requested that a particular role be allowed, then a case needs to
>    be made for why.
>
> Furthermore,
>
> and if they are omitted then HTML validators will start flagging valid
> constructs with false reports as being invalid usages of ARIA.
>
>
>
> What is in the current ARIA in HTML spec is what is implemented in the
> HTML validator. The rules have been implemented in the HTML validator in
> some form or other since 2010 as they were defined in HTML5.
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/dom.html#sec-strong-native-semantics>
>
> If you review those rules it will be evident that in most cases they are
> less stringent now than they were when initially defined. The relaxation of
> the rules has been, in general on a case by case basis, based on use cases.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
>
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
>
>
> On 15 March 2018 at 07:35, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.
> com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I've completed my initial review of the spec document as I was asked to do
> last week, and have filed the issues I discovered here
> https://github.com/w3c/html-aria/issues/102
>
> I don't recommend entering CR until these issues are addressed, because
> there are currently many roles that are missing from the accepted role
> usage column, and if they are omitted then HTML validators will start
> flagging valid constructs with false reports as being invalid usages of
> ARIA.
>
> The changes are relatively simple though by adding the missing roles, so
> an update likely wouldn't take long.
>
> There are some areas where the mappings seem unclear to me, or where I've
> added suggestions regarding default role mappings. Areas beginning with FYI
> are simply informative in case the info is helpful.
>
> All of the other content appears clear to me though, and I found no issues
> while scanning the remainder of the document.
>
> Bryan Garaventa
> Accessibility Fellow
> Level Access, Inc.
> Bryan.Garaventa@LevelAccess.com
> 415.624.2709 (o)
> www.LevelAccess.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 6:38 AM
> To: W3C WAI ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>; Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> Subject: Request from APA-WG re ARIA in HTML Spec
>
> Hello ARIA:
>
> Wearing my hat as APA Chair, I'd like to ask you to consider whether an
> ARIA review of the Web Platforms WG specification ARIA in HTML is needed.
> The Web Platforms WG has requested to take this specification to Candidate
> Recommendation (CR):
>
> http://w3c.github.io/html-aria/publish/index-CR-20180215.html
>
> There's considerable history behind this document which I won't attempt to
> summarize in this email. However, it would be very helpful for the ARIA-WG
> to take at least a quick look to determine whether there are any problems
> in this specification that should be cleared up before the document moves
> further.
>
> Janina
> --
>
> Janina Sajka
>
> Linux Foundation Fellow
> Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:       http://a11y.org
>
> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures        http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>