- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 09:45:39 +0300
- To: anthony.grasso@cisra.canon.com.au
- Cc: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>, "T. V Raman" <raman@google.com>, ian@hixie.ch, public-html@w3.org, www-svg@w3.org, public-xhtml2@w3.org
On Oct 22, 2007, at 08:02, Anthony Grasso wrote: > Is it possible to have this as a solution with ARIA: > "aaa:aria-*"? > > So in HTML we'd have: > <html> > <ul role="checkbox" aria-checked="true"> > <li>ROFL > </ul> > </html> > > And in SVG/XMl we'd have: > <svg version="1.1" > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" > xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" > xmlns:aaa="http://www.w3.org/2005/07/aaa"> > > <g xhtml:role="checkbox" aaa:aria-checked="true"> > <!-- Comment of randomness --> > </g> > </svg> > > It gives ARIA a naming convention - tick for HTML > It gives ARIA a name space - tick for SVG/XML Your proposal doesn't say what you'd do for XHTML5. aaa:aria-* isn't good for XHTML5, because it would create a scripting (and browser code path) discrepancy between HTML5 and XHTML5. If XHTML5 used aria- *, using aaa:aria-* for SVG would leave a scripting and browser code path discrepancy between XHTML5 and SVG. > It is pretty, easy to use and intuitive - tick for Authors I think it isn't pretty, because aaa:aria-* has two prefixes, which is crufty. It isn't easy to use or intuitive, because the syntax and DOM differ between host languages. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 06:46:15 UTC