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

Hi Bryan, the following is from ARIA in HTML, If this is not clear enough,
please file an issue with suggest rewording.

Web developers *MAY* use the ARIA role and aria-* attributes on HTML
> elements <https://www.w3.org/TR/html/dom.html#elements>, in accordance
> with the requirements described in [wai-aria-1.1
> <https://w3c.github.io/html-aria/#bib-wai-aria-1.1>], except where these
> conflict with the strong native semantics
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#host_general_conflict> or are equal
> to the implicit ARIA semantics
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#implicit_semantics> of a given HTML
> element. These constraints, are intended to prevent developers from making
> assistive technology products report nonsensical user interface (UI)
> information that does not represent the actual UI of the document.
>
> Web developers *MUST NOT* use the ARIA role and aria-* attributes in a
> manner that conflicts with the semantics described in the Document
> conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes in HTML
> <https://w3c.github.io/html-aria/#docconformance> table. Web developers *SHOULD
> NOT* set the ARIA role and aria-* attributes to values that match the implicit
> ARIA semantics
> <https://w3c.github.io/html-aria/#dfn-implicit-aria-semantics> defined in
> the table.
>
> https://w3c.github.io/html-aria/#rules-wd
>

--

Regards

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

On 18 March 2018 at 18:37, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> >they are not ARIA conformant according to the W3C?
>
> Correct, they are not conforming uses in HTML.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
> On 18 March 2018 at 07:45, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@levelaccess.
> com> wrote:
>
>> "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."
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, yes, I know that because I read all of it last week. What I'm
>> trying to understand is how this relates to ARIA usage conformance.
>>
>>
>>
>> Since you said earlier that the W3C HTML Validator maps to all of these
>> ARIA constraints, is it correct that, if a web technology does not meet
>> these constraints, that they are not ARIA conformant according to the W3C?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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 11:55 PM
>>
>> *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
>>
>>
>>
>> > 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.c
>> om> 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.c
>> om> 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.c
>> om> 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+001c7568bc22899eb274b9c
>> c4b088ccd916d25f1be7fc70492cf0000000116c2b9fa92a169ce1234ab9
>> 5@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+001c7568b35812b610f1587
>> aabadf887a76ad9e6b8eb94d792cf0000000116c298a892a169ce1234ab9
>> 5@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.c
>> om> wrote:
>>
>> <reply+001c7568acfc056d811d78e8ce4acfb1444fde85c25ce0b892cf0
>> 000000116c1e51b92a169ce1234ab95@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.c
>> om> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>