- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 21:30:21 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23370 Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-i | |ua.no --- Comment #1 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> --- Some comments just to clarify that we are on the same page: The consequence of @hidden being in the strong native semantics table is that it would be forbidden to set its aria-hidden state to _false_: <foo hidden="" aria-hidden="false"> But the this would still be allowed - but redundant: <foo hidden="" aria-hidden="true"> If @hidden was placed in the ”weak” table, it would not be forbidden to “override” it with a aria-hidden="false". But your focus i aria-hidden="true" - not aria-hidden="false". And in that regard, then is a piece of cake to make elements with @hidden *visible*: [hidden]{display:block}) As such, it would per my understanding be possible to solve your usecase (visible elements that should be hidden to AT users) the following way: <div style="display:block" hidden=""> Visual clutter that should be hidden from AT </div> But of course, it could be simpler to skip both the @style and the @hidden and just use aria-hidden. And in my view, @hidden in the strong table does not prevet aria-hidden="true" from being applied to elements without @hidden. Thus I don't see the problem that you see - one of us is probably reading something wrong ... :-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2013 21:30:23 UTC