- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:06:27 +0200
- To: "Gunderson, Jon R" <jongund@illinois.edu>
- Cc: 'W3C WAI-XTECH' <wai-xtech@w3.org>, 'HTML Accessibility Task Force' <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Gunderson, Jon R, Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:21:56 -0500: > I believe the intent of aria-hidden was to hide information that IS > presented visually from the accessibility API. If by "visually" you mean "not display:none", then yes. An element can appear hidden without having display:none. If you add aria-hidden=true to such an element, then to a user of ARIA supporting AT, the element will be hidden (but could, nevertheless and in the right context, be accessible, provided that you point to from the element in need of label/description with aria-labelledby/aria-describedby). > For example an image > that is used to indicate the state of a tree leaf does not need to be > part of the accessibility tree if aria-expanded state is being used. > > This way any aria- enabled technology would ignore the ALT text of > the image, and assistive technology that is not ARIA aware could may > use the ALT content of the image to describe state. Another way which ARIA allows you do this, is by making sure the <img> is considered presentational - then its @alt is hidden. You could do it this way: <img role="presentation" src=img alt="State info for un-ARIA-aware"> Or, for example, this way - where ARIA supporting AT SHOULD make the child element(s) invisible, unless you point to them via aria-labelledby/aria-describedby: <span role=img > <img src=img alt="State informatino for not ARIA aware"> </span> The latter way allows both ARIA-compatible and not ARIA-compatible UAs to see it as an image. If the feature is visual to all, then I believe ARIA suggests that yo dou not use aria-hidden. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2010 00:07:04 UTC