- From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 18:15:15 -0700
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: janina@rednote.net, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, W3C PF - DPUB Joint Task Force <public-dpub-aria@w3.org>
> On Jun 30, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > I can respond to the following now: > > dpub-toc: directory maps to a list in all the platforms. If you think that's a problem, address it via vendor ERs or in the Core AAM, but documents should still use "directory" role instead of a redundant "toc" role. > One would expect that lists can appear throughout a book. If I wanted to go to THE table of contents it would not work. Sounds like a problem with your book reader. Which one are you using? Navigation to the table of contents if standard in every reader I've ever used. It's standardized in other ways that do not require role overlap. > There is no distinction. I could see us subclassing directory however. > mapping: http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#role-map-directory > > dpub-part: is a name, apparently well known in the publication space. I will let Tzviya respond to that. "dpub-chaptergroup" might be a better name. > bibliography is not abbreviated. :-/ > However, we can look at the abbreviations. I can see where changing qna to questionsandanswers may get pushback as q and a are pretty well understood. It's still unclear why an extra role is needed. This is just a <dl>. or a "group" that surrounds a <dl>. The clarification if how this group is unique would be made apparent by the group's label. e.g. aria-labelledby="qnaheader" If there is an extra role, it should be to include the 1:1 mapping to HTML5: "descriptionlist", perhaps. > Rich > > Rich Schwerdtfeger > > From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> > Date: 06/25/2015 02:25 PM > >> I support the FPWD with these comments/issues. >> >> 1. Please link all the ISSUES notes to their respective issues. >> >> 2. dpub-toc is unnecessary. Use the general ARIA 1.0 role "directory" whose description is "Authors should use this role for a static table of contents, whether linked or unlinked. This includes tables of contents built with lists, including nested lists." >> >> 3. Role name abbreviation is still very inconsistent. "bibliography", "biblioref", "biblioterm", "qna"... Please note that ARIA does not abbreviate role names (except for one oversight, "img") >> >> 4. "dpub-part" is still too generic a name, and the previously filed issue/bug is not mentioned. >> >> 5. "dpub-noteref" and "dpub-glossref" are unnecessary. These are simple links. There is no need for another role. >> >> Most of this and other feedback was previously provided but does not appear to be addressed or mentioned. >> >> James >> >> >>> On Jun 24, 2015, at 8:44 AM, janina@rednote.net wrote: >>> >>> Colleagues: >>> >>> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to the Protocols and Formats Working >>> Group (PFWG) to approve a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) publication >>> of "WAI-ARIA Digital Publishing Module, Version 1.0" as requested by the >>> ARIA-Dpub Subteam at: >>> >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015May/0027.html > >
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2015 01:15:45 UTC