Re: aria vs native alternatives [was: Re: feedback requested on WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on Text alternatives in HTML 5 document]

hi jim,
>Why can't lynx or firefox use the aria-* attributes?  If (as suggested) the
aria
>spec itself forbids this, then I think that is a bug in the aria spec.
can you explain this statement a bit further?
what do you mean by use?

regards
steve

2009/9/2 Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>

> A few weeks ago, in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0899.html
>
> Smylers wrote:
> >> Aria is specifically about accessibility for those with disibilities.
> >> A user without any disabilities using, say, Lynx or Firefox with images
> >> turned off, would not be using any technology that processes aira-*
> >> attributes.  As such she would not see an alternative to the missing
> >> image, and would not know the purpose of the link.
>
> Ian agreed with:
> > ARIA is intended as an accessibility  API layer above the semantics
> > of HTML ... last resort ... even with ARIA as an integral part of the
> > language ... I don't think that removing ARIA markup should ever
> > make a page non-conforming.
>
> Why can't lynx or firefox use the aria-* attributes?  If (as suggested) the
> aria
> spec itself forbids this, then I think that is a bug in the aria spec.
>
> For "alt" in particular, it makes sense to keep using the legacy attribute,
> because of the installed base.  For new elements, I see nothing wrong
> with defining accessibility or fallback in terms of ARIA-* attributes, and
> I see nothing wrong with mainstream user agents relying on those
> attributes when they need information that the aria-* attributes supply.
>
> If anything, I think it would be a positive good, as mistakes in aria-*
> would
> then become more visible.
>
> -jJ
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html

Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 14:14:42 UTC