- From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:49:58 -0800
- To: "'Silvia Pfeiffer'" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > Maybe the a11y APIs need an update - since they, too, need to cope > with the challenge of the changes that have been made to HTML. I don't > think it's unreasonable to expect certain inconsistencies to emerge in > those tools that will need to be fixed. Hi Silvia, If you believe this to be true, I encourage you to file bugs with the various Operating Systems we have today(*), as those accessibility APIs are linked not to browsers (and HTML) but rather the Operating Systems themselves. (I'm not even sure how you would write this up as a bug). Given the complexity of these APIs however, and the time it would take to implement this type of fundamental change (including trickle through to related hardware and software installations), I would argue that it is reckless and harmful to proceed with this suggested Change Proposal at this time. Even if the APIs were changed however, how does this new spec-change address tab focus? If hidden text could be made to be "html-rich" somehow, that would then require including tab focus for many of those elements (<a>, <li>, <td>, etc.) to allow them work properly - but tab-able for whom? Just AT users? (How would that work?) Or all users? And if all users, what happens when sighted users start tabbing to elements that are not visible on screen? How does this benefit mobility impaired users, or users with cognitive disabilities? (See also: WCAG 2 - 2.4.7 Focus Visible: Any keyboard operable user interface has a mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator is visible. (Level AA)- http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-focus-visibl e.html) Ian's hasty change is poorly thought out, based on an incomplete and confused understanding of accessibility requirements and needs, and creates more problems than it sets out to solve. It is, frankly, a feeble attempt to once again thumb his nose at not only the entire W3C process (which he is openly disdainful of) but also the community of accessibility specialists at the W3C (who he willfully and consistently dismisses with open contempt - witness his continued use of the term "Cargo cult accessibility"). JF (*) Microsoft: UI Automation Team: Microsoft does not have a public bug-tracker, but the team can be contacted via: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/winuiautomation/archive/2009/05/15/meet-the-windows- ui-automation-accessibility-team.aspx Perhaps also here: https://connect.microsoft.com/site/sitehome.aspx?SiteID=136 ************* Mac OS / iOS: https://bugreport.apple.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/RadarWeb.woa/wa/signIn ************* Linux: Open Accessibility (A11y) Workgroup (IAccessible2, AT-SPI2): https://bugs.linuxfoundation.org/ ATK, AT-SPI, GAIL and GTK+: http://java-gnome.sourceforge.net/doc/api/4.1/org/gnome/atk/package-summary. html (?) https://bugzilla.gnome.org/ http://accessibility.kde.org/contact/ https://bugs.kde.org/
Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 07:50:38 UTC