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

RE: HTML5 default implicit semantics

From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 18:07:26 -0000
To: "'John Foliot'" <john.foliot@deque.com>, "'Steve Lee'" <steve@opendirective.com>, "'public-cognitive-a11y-tf'" <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Cc: "'W3C WAI Protocols & Formats'" <public-pfwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001c01d118bd$ff181930$fd484b90$@paciellogroup.com>
> From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
> Sent: 06 November 2015 15:32
> 
> Steve Lee [mailto:steve@opendirective.com] wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> 

> Thanks for this observation. I too have similar concerns...
 
> Author learning curves, and author fatigue in getting content marked-up
> correctly, is an on-going problem that is also impacted by scale: yes, large
> multi-national companies with dedicated accessibility teams and highly
> functioning engineers will likely get this right, but I fear how this will trickle
> down the author chain. 


This is a common problem. ARIA is often misunderstood, and (perhaps more importantly) so are the semantics that underpin it. Things are further compounded by the fact that ARIA is invisible. It makes playing/experimenting with it difficult for most developers, and consequently removes a common way for them to learn how a technology works.

When ARIA first came into existence we thought it was temporary. We've come a long way since then and ARIA is clearly here to stay. Perhaps this means we're at a good point to reevaluate the overall strategy and roadmap for ARIA?


Léonie.

-- 
Senior accessibility engineer @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup
Received on Friday, 6 November 2015 18:07:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:23:54 UTC