Re: Implementation questions around HTML structural elements and ARIA Landmarks

I think deferring to the HTML5 elements where possible makes the best
sense. I lament that there is a divergence between the aria roles and HTML
sections, but I understand why .... however, it causes extra time in my
training classes with developers to explain the situation.

NVDA defaults to announcing the aria-roles not the html5 elements. ASIDE
shows up as COMPLEMENTARY in the landmarks list etc...

But still I think the the HTML has better names.

Contentinfo is a little different because I usually apply it to a small
part of the footer which has the policy links, copyright link and address
etc... rather than all the links in the fat footer.

I'd like to see more use of the Role="Search"

Cheers,

David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

www.Can-Adapt.com



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Jason Kiss <jason@accessibleculture.org>
wrote:

> 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>