- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 08:27:04 -0500
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi Chaals, On 5/30/11, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:50:15 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer > <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thanks, Laura, for making some of the changes that I suggested. >> >> Actually, I want to discuss another question - one that will likely be >> core to the discussion with Jonas' proposed change proposal. >> >> The longdesc change proposal says in the section on "Suggested >> Alternatives Are Not Viable Solutions" about aria-describedby: >> >> "aria-describedby kills off links: ARIA 1.0 specifies that anything >> that aria-describedby points to is presented to the user as if it >> occurred inside an attribute. Hence, if aria-describedby points to an >> element which is - or contains - a link, the link will be completely >> dead - the AT won't even inform the user about the link presence. " >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/InstateLongdesc/AlternativesAreNotViableSolutions#aria-describedby >> >> I believe from recent discussions that ARIA specifies no such thing, > > It is ambiguous, but the definition refers to the definition of > aria-labeledBy which refers to > http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-label > which states that the value is a string (i.e. not markup) > > The definition also states that the reference is an ID reference, which > (following the white rabbit again until you finally get a statement) means > *within* the current > document. Do you think that anything in the ARIA section [1] of the change proposal should be reworded to make it clearer? If so, can you suggest specific verbiage? Thanks. Best Regards, Laura [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/InstateLongdesc/AlternativesAreNotViableSolutions#aria-describedby -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 13:27:33 UTC