- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 21:18:04 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23378 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords|CR | Whiteboard| |ARIA --- Comment #2 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> --- In one of the ancestors of this bug, steve points out that it's reasonable to have an element that's not marked as required="" to be marked as aria-required="" because the element might be labeled in prose as required even though it isn't required="", since the semantic of ARIA's 'required' is merely informative to the user, while required="" implies UA behaviour. The contrary doesn't make sense. So required="" should strongly imply aria-required=true (and disallow not having aria-required or saying aria-required=false), and the lack of required should only weakly imply aria-required=false (not disallow setting aria-required=true). This, as far as I can tell, is what the WHATWG spec says. (Note that the W3C spec has forked from this and seems to be bogus now, e.g. pointing to the wrong definition of "required" on the HTML side, having strong ARIA semantics in the weak ARIA semantics table, unnecessarily setting aria-required to its default, etc. The same mess seems to afflict aria-hidden for some reason.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 21:18:09 UTC