W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org > August 2015


From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 11:22:33 -0500
To: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
Cc: "public-cognitive-a11y-tf" <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFEAAD9F5E.E99F4F88-ON86257E96.00592580-86257E96.0059F49C@us.ibm.com>

My experience is that many people simply don't understand RDF. It was a
tremendous hurdle getting people to adopt and understand ARIA. Introducing
yet another technology would be a significant undertaking.

Rich Schwerdtfeger

From:	"lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
To:	"public-cognitive-a11y-tf" <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Date:	08/03/2015 09:50 AM
Subject:	ARIA or RDFA?

Liddies proposal was to use RDFa whereever possible inplace of an aria
The simplese case would look like
<button type="button" property="http://scehma.org/coga/terms/save
in place of

<button type="button" aria-function="undo" >default</button>

There are many ways to write it such as
<body vocab="http://scehma.org/coga/terms ">
<button type="button" property="save">default</button>
this might make it harder for simple user agents to parse and manipulate
it.  I also think in some cases it makes it more complex to use.

I do not think  everything will work as RDFa such as aria-importance or
aria-numberfree, so we would still be doing an aria extension.

I think we should look at the metadata  and see if there is a more RDF
compatible way to write it. However the linked data inline should be only
for easyread alternatives.

All the best

Lisa Seeman

Athena ICT Accessibility Projects
LinkedIn, Twitter

(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

Received on Monday, 3 August 2015 16:23:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:13:28 UTC