W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2012

Re: why are we pursuing this idea? (was: Implementation Details request on Issue 204 Decision)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 19:21:07 +0200
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120821192107794631.910a4407@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis, Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:11:33 +0100:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Leif Halvard Silli:
>> Comment: It seems safe to assume that that authors will become
>> surprised:
>> 1. Some will be surprised that <p hidden id=description> gets
>>    presented to users despite the hidden attribute.
>> 2. Others will be surprised (if they learn it at all) that
>>    VoiceOver currently flattens *any* aria-describedby
>>    referred content.
> Agreed.
> Doubtless some will also be surprised if @hidden content _is not_
> presented. I have a suspicion this may be the smaller group. If we had
> stuck with the original name of @irrelevant, this would have less
> surprising.

Well, here I strongly disagree: 
  a) ARIA allows to point to hidden content and this - give and 
     take - works well.
  b) A11Y annotations very often are hidden from most users (e.g.
     think of the content of the alt attribute). Or such things
     as placing content off screen etc.

Thus, 1) It is hypothetical that it could be made not to work.
      2) It does not really contradict what authors are used to.
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 17:21:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:55 UTC