- From: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 17:17:07 +0000
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Deborah Kaplan <dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com>
- CC: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, DPUB-ARIA <public-dpub-aria@w3.org>, WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <ae8c23216ef244038c432e5fb0b3f04f@CAR-WNMBP-006.wiley.com>
Hi Rich, If that wasn't clear, I apologize, but this conversation has been going on for months. Please refer to the feedback on the options available for extended descriptions that DPUB provided [1]. [1] http://w3c.github.io/dpub-accessibility/extended-description-analysis.html Thanks, Tzviya Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884 tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> From: Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:schwer@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 12:13 PM To: Deborah Kaplan Cc: Steve Faulkner; DPUB-ARIA; WAI Protocols & Formats Subject: Re: Proposal: remove aria-describedat from the ARIA 1.1 specification Deborah, That was not clear to people in the dub discussions we had at TPAC. aria-describedat does not solve that either. So you want a description AND an extended description. ... or is it that you want to have a description that can reside at a different location than what is in the page? Rich Rich Schwerdtfeger [Inactive hide details for Deborah Kaplan ---11/05/2015 11:04:54 AM---What the digital publishing industry was requesting in thi]Deborah Kaplan ---11/05/2015 11:04:54 AM---What the digital publishing industry was requesting in this particular case was a single mechanism f From: Deborah Kaplan <dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com<mailto:dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com>> To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com<mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com>> Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, DPUB-ARIA <public-dpub-aria@w3.org<mailto:public-dpub-aria@w3.org>>, WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org<mailto:public-pfwg@w3.org>> Date: 11/05/2015 11:04 AM Subject: Re: Proposal: remove aria-describedat from the ARIA 1.1 specification ________________________________ What the digital publishing industry was requesting in this particular case was a single mechanism for extended descriptions which always means extended description, and only means extended description. Deborah Kaplan On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Steve Faulkner wrote: > arai-flowto is another mechanism that could be used to provide a relationship between content and description > > http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-flowto > > -- > > Regards > > SteveF > Current Standards Work @W3C > > On 5 November 2015 at 16:20, Deborah Kaplan <dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com<mailto:dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com>> wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > > > You could link it via aria-describedby to whatever you are describing. This way you have an explicit extended > description. > > > But aria-describedby is for non-extended descriptions, standard > descriptions that can't be associated with standard controls. Admittedly > the formal description of the element is ambiguous, in that it > explicitly clarifies that a description is more verbose than a label, > but currently all AT (I believe) treats aria-describedby as a > non-extended description which should be placed in the normal flow and > not reported as special. Is the proposal that aria-describedby should > always mean extended descriptions, and anything which is less verbose > than an extended description belongs in a label? If that's the case, the > formal definition of aria-describedby will need to be clarified, and > screenreader manufacturers will need to be asked to change the behavior > accordingly (e.g. to treat aria-describedby like longdesc, not like > aria-labelledby). > > Deborah Kaplan > > Rich Schwerdtfeger > > Inactive hide details for Deborah Kaplan ---11/05/2015 10:07:45 AM---On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Richard Schwerdtfeger > wrote: > but I b Deborah > Kaplan ---11/05/2015 10:07:45 AM---On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > but I believe this > addresses the requirements of > > From: Deborah Kaplan <dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com<mailto:dkaplan@safaribooksonline.com>> > To: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS > Cc: WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org<mailto:public-pfwg@w3.org>>, DPUB-ARIA <public-dpub-aria@w3.org<mailto:public-dpub-aria@w3.org>> > Date: 11/05/2015 10:07 AM > Subject: Re: Proposal: remove aria-describedat from the ARIA 1.1 specification > > ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > _ > > > > > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > > > but I believe this addresses the requirements of > > the digital publishing industry. > > One of our biggest concerns was that this extended description be > something that could be semantically identified AS an extended > description. Was this addressed in discussions at TPAC? Based on the > email that has gone by, I have not seen anything that will distinguish > extended descriptions in <details> elements from anything else in a > <details> element. > > Deborah Kaplan > > > > > > >
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: image001.gif
Received on Thursday, 5 November 2015 17:18:30 UTC