Hi Jonas,
ARIA is going through Candidate Recommendation so changing the browser
implementation this late in the game is problematic. I read through the
code and I don't see what the patch does for accessibility. It appears to
simply be iterating through valid ids that match the describedby reference.
What are you actually doing with this patch as it is not clear?
I am working with Freedom Scientific to be able to process the link when
the accessible relationship references an anchor.
Thanks,
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group
From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Michael
Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Joseph Scheuhammer
<clown@alum.mit.edu>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTMLwg
<public-html@w3.org>, Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS,
David Bolter <dbolter@mozilla.com>
Date: 04/25/2011 03:51 PM
Subject: Re: False aria-describedby expectations in ARIA Authoring
Practices (longdesc)
Sent by: wai-xtech-request@w3.org
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Steve Faulkner
<faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jonas
>
> "By modifying the code that reads from the DOM and exposes the relevant
information to AT."
>
> Can you provide the code or a link to the patch?
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=652635
> You wrote:
> "Possibly, but wouldn't we be building a better world by leaning on
browser vendors to fix their aria implementations, rather than leaningon
aria authors to tell them to "dumb down" their aria usage."
>
> Providing authoring guidance on what works leads to better practical
outcomes for users. Leading developers to code to fictional features does
not.
I don't believe I proposed any such thing.
/ Jonas
