W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > December 2009


From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 18:03:52 +0100
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20091203180352431913.95efa742@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Ian Hickson, Wed, 2 Dec 2009 01:50:47 +0000 (UTC):
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Cynthia Shelly wrote:
>> On orientation:  What do you think of Leif Halvard Silli's proposal from 
>> last week? 
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2009Nov/0090.html 
> If we were to have an explicit attribute, I'd be more comfortable with 
> having it actually cause the table to be sorted, rather than having it 
> just declare the sort order. This would lead to a better accessibility 
> experience, on the one hand because it'd be more likely to be used, and on 
> the other because it'd be more likely to be accurate.
> BTW, the attribute that Leaf proposes seems redundant with aria-sort="".

Let me see ... Reading ARIA ... I cooked up an example of how 
Aria-sort="" is intended to be used:

<tr><th aria-sort="descending">1</th></tr>

Above, the aria-sort value tells the user that in this table, all the 
"Items are sorted in descending order by this column." [1]

One difference from my what my @definesorder idea is that @aria-sort is 
more specific (since it describes what kind of order - 
"ascending/descending/other") than I suggested. Another difference is 
that aria-sort="" should be applied to a column TH heading cell or row 
TH heading cell, while talked about using TR and COL.

Thus I agree that aria-sort="" is basically very similar to what I 
suggested. Using aria-sort="" as a way of informing about the 
orientation thus seems possible. Only possible thing: What if it is not 
clear what kind of order, but it is still clear which column? 

>> It seems like using a row or column in the table to define order is less 
>> presentation-specific, and more based on content in the specific table 
>> instance.  I think this approach has potential, and would like to 
>> explore it further.  Does it mitigate your concerns?
> I'm not sure to what "it" refers here. Are you proposing removing this 
> particular part of the proposed task force recommendation?

[1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/states_and_properties#aria-sort

leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 3 December 2009 17:04:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:27 UTC