- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:18:21 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: 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>
Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-10-22 17.00: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Leif Halvard Silli: >> To make <h1 role="button"> non-conforming *is* to restrict how it can be >> used and *is* to treat ARIA different from CSS. > > Indeed, I think it should be treated differently. Making it > non-conforming is one step in that. > >> The only likeness between CSS and ARIA that I suggested, is that ARIA should >> over-rule the default semantics, the same way that CSS should overrule >> default styling. > > I still don't see why this should be allowed. Just use the closest > proper element. We agree that it should be disallowed. But we perhaps disagree about whether it should work. > Philip` pointed me to some of his raw data, at > http://philip.html5.org/data/role-attributes-raw.txt, which is very > helpful. This is every usage of @role across 425k pages. Scanning > the list, you find only a handful of uses which are ARIA-related, and > none of them are gross mispurposings of default element semantics. Well, HTML doesn't allow ARIA yet, so that's fine, isn't it? ;-) It would also be interesting to check whether people actually use CSS in order to misuse <h1> ... I don't know if a handful of pages can be used to formed an opinion. But if we had info about a handful of UAs that support ARIA, about whether they always let ARIA over-rule the default semantics, then that would definitely be helpful. I think simple rules are better. Why don't you agree? -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 22 October 2009 15:18:58 UTC