- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 02:23:01 +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>
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis, Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:46:18 +0100: > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Leif Halvard Silli: >> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis, Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:11:33 +0100: >>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Leif Halvard Silli: >>> 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: > > You mean you disagree with my suspicion? Yes. Your above claim was that only few - the smaller group - would be surprised if @hidden causes e.g. an aria-describedby to not have effect when its points to hidden content. >> a) ARIA allows to point to hidden content and this - give and >> take - works well. I should have said that I, by 'hidden content', did not refer to specifically to @hidden. > I've only seen one attempt at doing this in the wild, and the author's > expectation was that hidden content would be excluded when referenced. If he referenced it with e.g. aria-labelledby, then may he needs to sharpen his reasoning. > The examples provided in the Change Proposals are a mixture of the > broken (e.g. an ASCII art image is left without a defined accessible > name) and the nonsensical - and that's _after_ various other mistakes > I pointed out were corrected. So … what makes you think it "works > well", assuming that you're factoring authors getting the markup right > into the equation? Sorry, I did not mean @hidden. I mean the *concept* of referring to variously hidden content. For instance, as I said @alt is hidden, and @aria-label is hidden, and @aria-labelledby may point to something hidden etc. Thus, there is a pattern there. However, of course, ARIA can be difficult to get into. It took a while before I started to get it. >> 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. > > @alt and off-screen content are displayed to users in the > comparatively familiar cases where you have images or stylesheets off > or they don't load. > > That's very different from @irrelevant. I agree. However, the concept that something that is - for the time being - hidden/invisible, can still be available to A11Y users, is well known. And also, as you know, aria-label/labbelledby/describedby are not - unlike @alt - affected by whether images load or whether CSS is enabled or disabled. So already when using the aria-label/describedby/labelledby attributes, one is in danger with regard to risk for creating content that has an imperfect fallback in e.g. text browsers. So, if referring to content that is @hidden in and by itself is such a big problem, then we should perhaps go deeper and look at aria-label/describedby/labelledby as well. In a summary, I think that, with aria-label/describedby/labelledby and @hidden, one is already in trouble. And I think that the purpose of ARIA very much is to make something that works when the Web site is consumed the way it is intended to be consumed - with scripting, CSS and everything. To make it *also* work in a text browser thus requires that one think of specifically that problem. >> Thus, 1) It is hypothetical that it could be made not to work. > > What do you mean? I didn't say anything about making things work, I'm > just talking about author expectations. OK. Sorry if that was a bad point ... >> 2) It does not really contradict what authors are used to. > > Authors aren't used to a11y markup at all. (In my day job I interview > plenty of people employed as frontend developers who don't know the > <legend> element, who don't understand how <label> is associated with > form fields, and to whom ARIA is barely more than a rumour.) Weird interviews you make. :-D Yes. I can imagine.Myself, I think that I would recommend using display:none rather than @hidden, as display:none does not have the additional aria-hidden=true meaning and is thus more flexible when creating JavaScript-free interactivity via CSS and hyper links. But my point was very small: Like I said above, authors often know about @alt. And they know that @alt does not render - unless unless ... And thus they are used to the concept that invisible content can be useful to e.g. unsighted users. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2012 00:23:36 UTC