Re: Implementation questions around HTML structural elements and ARIA Landmarks

I agree with you and Léonie, but I'm not sure about "Footer" for
contentinfo. Most contentinfo sections are probably <footer> elements,
but that doesn't make every footer a contentinfo landmark. That said,
I can't think of anything better than "content information". AXAPI
uses "content information" as AXRoleDescription for role=contentinfo,
and "footer" for <footer> that's not part of <article> or <section>.
Would it be informative at all to review actual use of contentinfo in
the wild? Is it really used elsewhere than on a page's main <footer>?

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Léonie Watson
<lwatson@paciellogroup.com> wrote:
> Cynthia Shelly wrote:
>
> “Question #1: There are structural elements and aria landmarks with
> equivalent functions and different names.  We’re trying to decide if we
> should use the same localized control type string for these (and if so,
> which), or use the element or role even when they’re different.  These are
> the items with conflict, and my proposals for how to handle them.  Does this
> make sense?”
>
>
>
> It does. My comments below are from the perspective of a screen reader user,
> as opposed to a standards person…
>
>
>
> “Role=banner and <header> both have localized control type of “Header.”
> Using the HTML name because it matches the footer (which ARIA doesn’t have)
> and because it seems a more common name for the area at the top of the page.
> In discussions with my internal team, people assumed “banner” was an ad and
> should be mapped to an image type, while header was the top area of the
> page.”
>
>
>
> I agree. Header is the more user-friendly term for the chunk of content at
> the top of a page.
>
>
>
> “Role=complementary and <aside> both have localized control type of “Aside.”
> Because aside is more plain language, and easier to hear read by a screen
> reader.  Are there items that would be role=complementary where “aside” is
> not an accurate description?  I think they are the same, but I’m willing to
> be convinced that they are more like aside and complementary.”
>
>
>
> Aside seems to be the more user-friendly term to me. I actually think
> complimentary was the wrong choice for the name of the role, but that’s a
> whole other conversation!
>
>
>
> “Role=contentinfo and <address> will be mapped separately with localized
> control types of “Content Information” and “Address” because address is a
> kind a content info, but there are other kinds.  Can anyone think of a more
> plain-language way of describing content info?  I don’t think most end users
> will understand this term.”
>
>
>
> Footer? It might not always be a complete fit, but as with header I think
> it’s the more familiar term – and people generally understand that a footer
> contains information relating to other stuff on the page.
>
>
>
> “Role=navigation and <nav> both have localized control type of “Navigation”
> because this user-facing string is not a good place for a geeky
> abbreviation.”
>
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>  “Question 4:  Does it make sense to add application to the landmarks loop?
> It seems to be used mostly on the body tag.”
>
>
>
> The use cases for doing this seem vanishingly small to me.
>
>
>
> Question 5: I don’t think it makes sense to add <h1>-<h6> to the landmarks
> loop because 1) it would be redundant with existing heading navigation 2)
> Lots of landmarks will include headings and either flattening that structure
> or making users navigate a hierarchy seems like a bad user experience 3) and
> all of these other things are containers and headings are not.
>
> Does anyone disagree?”
>
>
>
> No, it would be a bad idea to add headings to the landmark navigation loop.
> I use landmark and heading navigation for quite different purposes, and
> combining the two would hinder both navigation strategies.
>
>
>
> “Question 6:  Is there a browser/AT combo that you think has a particularly
> good user experience for navigating landmarks and structural elements?  What
> do you like about it?”
>
>
>
> Not exactly, but I do like the ability in Jaws to move directly to the start
> of the <main> with a single shortcut (q). It’s also included in the landmark
> navigation loop, but the ability to target it directly is extremely useful.
>
>
>
> Léonie.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Senior Accessibility Engineer, TPG
>
> @LeonieWatson @PacielloGroup
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 19 March 2015 22:27:03 UTC