Feedback: (RE: Finalizing an Issue-204 CP)

Colleagues:

After the intense mail load on our Issue-204 CP candidates these last
few days, I'm not surprised people seem to have taken a break today.

Nevertheless, it would be good to wrap this up, if we can. After all, I
know many of us are eager to get Issue-30 on the table, and this is the
blocking issue for that.

So, where are we?

I see some excellent suggestions from Benjamin earlier today. Cynthia,
did you catch those? Any reaction?

John, Laura, are we there with this draft from Cynthia? Or is there
more? As of late last night, it was my impression we were close. How
does it look after a day away?

Lastly, it may be time to run the spell-checker! I note some missing
'i's in words like 'accessibility,' and a missing 's' in the word
'exist.'

Speaking of which, the occurance of 'exist' appears to be a run-on
sentence.

Janina

Cynthia Shelly writes:
> I have no opinion on making it a class=note.  I made the change, but it doesn't seem to make any visible change in the wiki.  Anyone know if it will be picked up when added to the spec?
> 
> I can live with "most screen readers", though I don't actually have data on screen-readers across language markets etc., and can't attest to "most" myself.  I chose "some" because I know that is true.  Janina, any opinion on that?
> 
> I think I've covered all of your feedback now.  What do you think?  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Foliot [mailto:john@foliot.ca] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:44 PM
> To: Cynthia Shelly; 'Laura Carlson'; 'Janina Sajka'; 'HTML Accessibility Task Force'
> Cc: 'Joshue O Connor'; 'Judy Brewer'; david100@sympatico.ca; 'Richard Schwerdtfeger'; 'James Nurthen'; 'Leif Halvard Silli'; 'Jonas Sicking'
> Subject: Feedback: (RE: Finalizing an Issue-204 CP)
> 
> Cynthia Shelly wrote:
> > 
> > OK, I think I'm close.
> > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Correct_Hidden_Attribute_Section_v2#Acc
> > es
> > sibility_API_mappings
> > 
> > 1) rewrote summary to talk more about @hidden being simpler than CSS, 
> > rather than @aria-describedby being simpler than something else
> > 2) changed example to one using an input and a label rather than an 
> > image with a short and long description
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> > 3) added section on what happens in the API when the item is hidden or 
> > not hidden
> > 4) added the aria-labelledby row to the table from UIAG to show that 
> > the behavior is not just for description
> > 5) changed the details section to offer stronger advice to authors not 
> > to do this with structured content.
> 
> I continue to advocate for stronger advisory text here. I would propose the following edit/change:
> 
> <p>...However, hidden elements may be used to provide descriptive strings, using aria-describedby and aria-labelledby and the <label> element.</p>
> 
> <p class="note">Any structure in the referenced element, including headings, links, tables, paragraphs, and form elements, will be lost. The text children of the element will be flattened to a string. As such, authors should only use this technique for string content. At the time of this writing, <del>some</del> <ins>most</ins> screen reader products will read both the accessible name and accessible name <ins>with no prompting</ins>, so authors should take care with the length of text provided via this method.</p>
> 
> (Is there a strong reason to not put this final piece in as a <p class="note"> in the spec?)
> 
> 
> > 6) minor copy edits, adding <code> styling, etc.
> > 
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> JF
> 
> 
> 

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
		sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 19:53:58 UTC