- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:09:39 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7711 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #6 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2009-10-18 10:09:38 --- > I think ARIA integration has been tricky enough that it may be worth erring on > the side of being too explicit. I disagree. I think the danger of being too explicit is that implementors would be swiming in trivial requirements and would miss the important ones. > In the specific case of aria-valuenow, range and spinbutton make it a required > attribute I assume you mean slider and spinbutton. When the spec sets an implied role=slider, it always also implies aria-valuenow. For the case of role=spinbutton, there's one case where it can't set aria-valuenow, namely when the value is not known. (Setting it to "" is just as non-conforming as omitting it, except the ARIA spec says it SHOULD NOT be specified if the value is not known, which implies a preference to omitting it.) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 18 October 2009 10:09:40 UTC