- 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