Re: FORMAL OBJECTION (was RE: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-204 aria-hidden)

Duly recorded:

- Sam Ruby

On 08/13/2012 10:28 PM, John Foliot wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>>     * Assertion of "harmful behaviors" is also not sufficiently
>> supported
>>       by evidence.  In particular, it makes a claim that has previously
>>       been disputed, and without a single example of such markup.
> It is impossible to demonstrate harmful behaviors in a technology that has
> yet to surface - this is a ludicrous statement.
> Placing a <a href>Link</a> inside an @hidden container MUST still take tab
> focus for a non-sighted user and their Assistive Technology to interact with
> it, yet at the same time hides that focus from the sighted user: this is
> simple logic. Proving the harm of this is currently impossible due to lack
> of implementation anywhere: conversely however no one has been able to prove
> that this is NOT harmful.
> Allowing tab-focusable content to reside inside of a container that is
> specifically hidden to any other user, including a sighted, key-board only
> user, is harmful because that sighted user will lose track of their tab
> focus, with no other means of knowing where their cursor is.
> This is a direct contravention of a WCAG 2 AA Requirement:
> 	"2.4.7 Focus Visible: Any keyboard operable user interface has a
> mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator is visible."
> isible
> Therefore, implementation of this Change Proposal is a Direct and Willful
> Violation of the existing WCAG Specification, and the basis of My Formal
> Objection. I do not believe that the HTML5 WG should be violating such an
> important W3C Recommendation (one which countless countries and industries
> have based their entire on-line accessibility requirements - whether
> policies or legislation - upon).
> John Foliot

Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 03:04:48 UTC