- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 23:10:26 +0000
- To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
- Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+Vm_g06EwZsrkSRR3cQ+Exd6tLnOwkZ6s2pXeVznJFnDtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all, have been analysing some of the data I collected previously [1]. Of 50 pages [2] I have looked at so far (from the set of 400+ pages[3] that I have added styles to provide easy visual identification of elements with id=main|content) > 90% of elements with an id=main|content do indeed contain content that excludes header/nav/footer type content. you can see the results and source pages for your selves: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlVP5_A996c5dHozOW14RkF4NEdEUFRvemxCZ2I4Z3c I think this is a reasonable indication (please point out if my analysis is incorrect0 that there is a common concept of what is considered the main content area of a document and that fears of misuse of an element based on this concept are over emphasised. Do I need to analyse more of the data set or is this enough? [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Oct/0109.html [2] starting from 296 in the list [RDS.ca<http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/HTML5-main-content/www.rds.ca/index.html> ] [3] http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/HTML5-main-content/ regards SteveF On 2 December 2012 19:10, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 1, 2012, at 6:39 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > >> >> I think this will be a lot more effective at limiting the harm from >> potential improper use of <main> than a conformance error. A conformance >> error is a discouragement for some authors, but most content is >> non-conforming. Meanwhile, implementation behavior can avoid incorrectly >> identifying the main content even in the face of authors who do not >> prioritize document conformance. >> > > > Could that also include a rule as to what to do in case there is both a > <main> and a role="main" on the page? While it's a conformance error, > browsers still need to decide which one to expose to AT. So, maybe in this > case it would be best to expose the element with role="main" only? > > > Yes, I think it would be good to have rules to disambiguate cases like > this. It probably makes the most sense for explicit role=main to win, but I > could also imagine having whichever appears first win. > > > > I agree with this suggestion. I would also like to see "Scooby Doo" >> documented properly. I do wonder, however, since (if?) it is only >> accessibility related, whether it should be in the HTML spec, or in the >> mapping spec of Stever, or in a WCAG spec. >> >> >> I think a "find the main content" algorithm has non-accessibility uses as >> well, for example for data mining tools, or for "readability" style tools >> or browser features. >> > > Right. So it should indeed be part of the extension spec, and thus > ultimately of HTML, right? > > > If the <main> extension ended up integrated in the HTML spec, then I think > the HTML spec would clearly be the right place for a "find the main > content" algorithm. > > Regards, > Maciej > > > >
Received on Sunday, 2 December 2012 23:11:37 UTC