- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 06:18:29 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10919 Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com --- Comment #6 from Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> 2010-10-05 06:18:28 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Where does ARIA say this should happen? Assuming by "this", you mean "Elements with role='presentation' are omitted from the accessibility tree and their children are presented as if direct children of the next element up": "For any element with a role of presentation and which is not focusable, the user agent MUST NOT expose the implicit native semantics of the element (the role and its states and properties) to accessibility APIs. However, the user agent MUST expose content and descendant elements that do not have an explicit or inherited role of presentation. Thus, the presentation role causes a given element to be treated as having no role or to be removed from the accessibility tree, but does not cause the content contained within the element to be removed from the accessible tree." http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-20100916/roles#presentation > Isn't aria-owns the official way to do this? "aria-owns" specifies parent-child relationships not reflected by the DOM. It does not remove any elements from the accessibility tree. http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-20100916/states_and_properties#aria-owns Question for the OP, the bug description asks to allow role="presentation" on any element, but the description gives a use case for applying it to container elements. Is there a use case for allowing it on any elements that cannot contain other elements and where role="presentation" is currently non-conforming? -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2010 06:18:31 UTC