Re: Proposal: <content> element

Steven Faulkner wrote:
> Hi bruce, agree with you,
> the concerns I have with the mapping of ARIA landmark roles to HTML 5
> elements are:
> 1. there is no comparable element to role="main"

I'm not entirely convinced this needs to be mapped directly to an 
element, rather than simply letting be implied as all of the content 
following the body element's first header element, if any, or else the 
whole content of body, excluding footer and nav sections.

Consider the following example:

<body>
   <header><h1>...</h1></header>
   <article>Article 1</article>
   <article>Article 2</article>
   <footer>...</footer>
</body>

In this case, the main content would be assumed to be both articles.  (I 
realise this may be a little too simple to handle some of the more 
complex cases, but I'm fairly sure the idea could be refined to make it 
work more reliably)

> 2. there is no comparable element to role="banner" as <header> is allowed to
> be used multiple times within a document and it states in the ARIA spec that
> 'Within any document or application, the author *SHOULD* mark no more than
> one element with the banner role.'

This could be defined to map to the first header element in the page 
who's nearest sectioning element ancestor is the body element.

> 3. while currently role="contentinfo" does not have an authoring restriction
> like role="banner", i believe this is an oversight, and it should have. If
> so there will be the same issue with mapping it to <footer>, which can also
> be present multiple times in a html5 document.

If that restriction were to be applied to role="contentinfo", then it 
could similarly be defined to map to the first (or maybe last) footer 
element in the page who's nearest sectioning element ancestor is the 
body element.

-- 
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/

Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 09:42:23 UTC