- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:34:24 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11557 --- Comment #41 from Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> 2012-03-13 07:34:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #40) > (In reply to comment #33) > > <button role=button aria-pressed=true> should not do anything different than > > <button aria-pressed=true> according to the ARIA spec as far as I can tell > > (that's what the "implicit semantics" stuff is all about!). If it does, ARIA > > should be fixed. > > Ian, you're misunderstanding the role of ARIA in the DOM. Redundant ARIA is > really helpful for supporting existing ATs and it's quite handy for exposing > data easily with JS libraries. Perhaps you've misunderstood what Ian is saying in your quotation. Steve is saying that in current implementations, role="button" in that markup is *not* redundant since you need it to make "aria-pressed" work. If you omit role="button", then the button is not reported as pressed in the accessibility tree. Ian is saying that it *should* work even if you omit role="button", since ARIA allows host languages to define implicit ARIA semantics on elements and attributes, and HTML5 defines button as having the implied semantic of role button, so "aria-pressed" should apply to it the same way. So there's a question here about how ARIA annotations do and should behave beyond the question of whether we should allow redundant markup. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2012 07:34:26 UTC