Re: role vs aria-role

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Henri Sivonen<> wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2009, at 08:33, Jim Jewett wrote:

>> Please allow the use of "aria-role" for the purposes currently filled
>> by the "role" attribute in all processing related to aria.

> Too late. Implementations have shipped.

It is too late to say "Don't use a bare 'role' ", but I don't think it
is too late to say "Also support 'aria-role' " or even "if 'role' and
'aria-role' disagree, believe 'aria-role' ".

The shipped implementations won't have that extra piece of
functionality, but things that do work won't stop working.  (And since
aria-* is invisible metadata, I suspect it won't even lead to many
opportunity costs -- the people who switch to the more consistent
'aria-role' in the very short term are likely to be people who were
already having error-prone on this attribute.)


Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 07:09:55 UTC