- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:28:12 -0800
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:20 PM, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > I think both suggestions sound good. > > On Dec 1, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > >> <chair hat off> >> >> Hello Steve & James, >> >> One concern raised by WebKit contributors was that <main> could end up getting frequently misused, and as a result, could harm accessibility. James's conformance rules will slightly reduce misuse, but probably not eliminate it. However, if these plus the current conformance rules capture the scenarios of misuse, how about making <main> not have an implied role=main in these cases? In other words, make it affect implementation behavior as well as conformance. This would significantly reduce the potential downsides of <main>, I think. And in the case where you truly need to violate these rules to mark the main content, you can always use an explicit role=main. > > One think to consider is is that it would be hard for most authors to determine when the role semantics are invalidated by an author error. For implementations that revoke the default role of main based on this authoring error, could we require the implementation to also send a warning to the console.log? Generally the core Web platform specs do not require mandatory diagnostics for misuse, because this steps beyond the limits of what is required for interoperability. However, it seems like a fine idea to at least suggest that. Regards, Maciej
Received on Sunday, 2 December 2012 01:28:39 UTC