- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 20:04:13 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23384 Bug ID: 23384 Summary: ARIA: <script>, <style>, <head> etc should not have aria-hidden="true" as default. Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Hardware: PC OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: HTML5 spec Assignee: dave.null@w3.org Reporter: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: faulkner.steve@gmail.com, jcraig@apple.com, mike@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, public-html-admin@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org, xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/dom.html#sec-strong-native-semantics Currently, <script>, <style>, <head> (etc) have gotten aria-hidden="true" as a strong, native semantic. As consequence, if an author makes - via CSS - any of these elements visible, AT users will not get the content since the aria-hidden="true" semantics would not be removed by a change of the CSS. Also, moving thes elements from the strong to the weak table would not change much since, even then, users would not get the content unless the author made sure to change the default aria-hidden status from "true" to "false". I would argue that nothing is gained by giving script, style, head etc aria-hideen="true" as a default value. Rather, I think HTML5 should just considere these elements as hidden, in the traditional display:none meaning of the word. As small detail for <head> is that it contains <title>, and since the aria-hidden state applies to the children as well, this woiuld in theory hide the title element. One could ask for the usecase for making script/style/head visible. And yes, it will probably not be done very often. But the fact that is is so seldom done also means that there is no problem to solve - thuse we don't need to say that these elements should have aria-hidden="true" as default. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 27 September 2013 20:04:17 UTC