W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2009

Re: ARIA roles added to the a element should be conforming in HTML5.

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:46:00 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad0911101046k600c3d17rf7435a510540e85e@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Lars Gunther <gunther@keryx.se>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu> wrote:
> We all can pretty much agree that making an <h1> a 'button' doesn't really
> make a whole lot of semantic sense, but (as someone pointed out earlier) if
> a content author decides, against better recommendations, to make a <h1> a
> button that activates an accordion expansion, then we should be able to
> convey that important information to AT in all its wrongness - not being
> able to do so penalizes the AT user, not the content author.

Since I brought up that example, that sort of markup actually isn't a
bad idea in my opinion.  Now it would probably be better done with
<details>, but when that didn't exist a <div><h1/><p/></div> was a
good approximation of the semantics.  In some cases it still might be
better semantically, for example if you were implementing a tab-based
interface in js.

*Is* it most helpful to convey to ATs that the heading is a button in
that example?  Are there better ways to do it?  You really
can't/shouldn't use an actual <button> in the example, because it's
*not* semantically a button, it's a heading.  It's only when you bring
behavior into the mix that acquires a slightly different character.

Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2009 18:46:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:03 UTC