Re: Proposal: simple annotation semantics with aria-detailstype

Stefan et al.,

I've attached an HTML example of the proposed markup. It is not expected to
work in screen readers yet, although in some cases it will already be
exposed by the browser (Firefox automatically exposes unknown aria-foo
attributes as IA2 object attributes).

Aaron

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 2:45 AM Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
wrote:

> Can we have more mockup examples for this in use, please? Given that, one
> can detect possible caveats and pitfalls easier.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Aaron Leventhal [mailto:aleventhal@google.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:26 PM
>
>
> *To:* ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
>
> *Subject:* Proposal: simple annotation semantics with aria-detailstype
>
>
>
> People on the W3C call today weren't too sure about using the role on the
> target of aria-details, in order to specify the type of annotation. Here's
> an alternate proposal:
>
>
>
> Use aria-details + optional aria-detailstype on the same element with one
> of the following values:
>
> assessing, classifying, commenting, describing (default), editing,
> highlighting, identifying, linking, moderating, questioning, replying,
> tagging
>
> These values are imported from web annotations motivation vocabulary, but
> ARIA can eventually add additional types such as "breakpoint" for web-based
> code editors.
>
>
>
> This is still very simple to implement in browsers, AAM's and AT's. It
> also doesn't lead to an expansion of roles, and is more self-describing
> than using the role, which probably seems like ARIA black magic that only a
> few would know about.
>
>
>
> Do people like it?
>
>
>
> Aaron
>