Re: HTML5 default implicit semantics

Hello,

Usage will be a challenge I completely agree. 

Driving adopt will be hard. This in an area where I hope that our presence in organisations like the BBC can act as a role model.

I like the point you making and agree that a prefix would be useful.

It's a very subtle and astute observation. Nice one. 

Jamie + Lion

Sent from my iPhone

> On 6 Nov 2015, at 11:34, Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com> wrote:
> 
> This older post by the mighty Steve Faulkner got me thinking about the
> proposals for extending aria. I'm not criticising these extensions but
> wanted to raise some thing that has be nagging at me.
> 
> The underlying question in my mind is how do we get authors to use new
> ARIA attributes for coga? It's proved not easy to get ARIA widely
> used.
> 
> http://html5doctor.com/on-html-belts-and-aria-braces/
> 
> In this article Steve points out that the belt a braces approach of
> adding ARIA to built in controls is not needed with newer browsers.
> The reason is the browser assigns default semantics and exposes those
> via the a11y APIS. This is exactly how it should be and leaves ARIA
> markup to be most useful when defining custom controls and structure.
> 
> In contrast, if I correctly understand the suggestions, we are
> proposing an extension to this model of ARIA articulating predefined
> semantics. The new attributes are unlikely to ever be useful for a
> default semantic for controls or structure. Rather they are for
> authors to add semantics to their content and structure which clarify
> intent and as such they can be no default semantics.
> 
> Content and structure may operate at a higher level of semantics,
> rather like custom controls and so always need to be described. I
> still worry we'll have a job getting authors to actually use the new
> attributes.
> 
> Perhaps this doesn't matter much as the ARIA provides semantics in
> both cases. However, the proposed coga_ prefix may be useful as it
> helps keep this potential difference in mind
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Steve Lee
> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
> 


-----------------------------
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.
-----------------------------

Received on Friday, 6 November 2015 14:41:51 UTC