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

Re: ARIA or RDFA?

From: Jamie Knight <Jamie.Knight@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 18:14:17 +0000
To: Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com>
CC: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB064FA6-F0ED-4A54-9A55-ABD91C13A76A@bbc.co.uk>
+1 if we use RDFa uptake will be tiny.

We need to be accessible to authors with cognitive impairments too. ;)

Jamie + Lion

Sent from my iPhone

On 3 Aug 2015, at 18:24, Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com<mailto:steve@opendirective.com>> wrote:

+1 to Richard

RDF is understood / popular in academic circles and of course TBL for the semantic web but I don't think anywhere else such as general web dev community.

We dev is complex enough already - just see recent posts by PPK and Bruce Lawson :)

https://dev.opera.com/blog/on-a-moratorium-on-new-browser-features/



Steve Lee
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com


On 3 August 2015 at 17:22, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com<mailto:schwer@us.ibm.com>> wrote:

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

<graycol.gif>"lisa.seeman" ---08/03/2015 09:50:15 AM---Liddies proposal was to use RDFa whereever possible inplace of an aria extentionThe simplese case wo

From: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com<mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com>>
To: "public-cognitive-a11y-tf" <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org<mailto: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 extention
The simplese case would look like
<button type="button" property="http://scehma.org/coga/terms/save">default</button>
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 <http://accessibility.athena-ict.com/>
LinkedIn<http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter<https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>







----------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

---------------------

graycol.gif
(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

graycol.gif
(image/gif attachment: 02-graycol.gif)

Received on Monday, 3 August 2015 18:14:53 UTC

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