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

>But it is often bad HTML in so far as it is not semantically correct, e.g.
>Making a custom button from a bunch of divs when you could use a more
>semantically appropriate element such as <button>. That isn't an intended
>use of HTML?
> Or maybe they currently "can't" because you can't style a  button 
>enough to give it the desired rendering.
>This is exactly one of the reasons why ARIA was invented .. in artwork for
>web development, function follows form and not vice versa. This lesson is
>hard to learn, I know.
Sailesh: The solution then is to enhance the styling capabilities available
to authors. Overriding the native role of elements  by using complex JS and
CSS is like re-inventing the wheel or  creating more work for  oneself.
>ARIA is also to end up discussions like "ok .. manual says "press the
>button there". Which button? My AT announces 'link'".
Sailesh:At the end of the day after all that "work" what does one have? A
link or div or image  coded and made to look like a button when one could
have simply  used the button element or INPUT type=img and gone  on to
accomplish far greater things        in the day.
Sailesh Panchang

>I wish there was no need for ARIA. I wish in a future version of HTML there
>would be a full range of fully css style-able controls, and when someone
>thinks of a new piece of UI, if it can't be achieved semantically it is
>submitted to the HTML WG and they mandate it for a future release rather
>than developers hacking it up out of divs and script.

>I rather idealistically feel that accessibility should be built in, not
>tacked on afterward with ARIA or anything else, but we all know this
>utopian world will never exist.

Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 13:40:17 UTC