- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:55:01 -0800
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- Cc: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> wrote: > On 2/10/2012 9:45 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 12:16 AM, John Foliot<john@foliot.ca> wrote: >> >>> (even though, as I have discovered via limited testing, what is >>> being pointed to is returned back as null content to in the screen >>> readers I >>> tested, which is currently correct behavior) - the point being it is not >>> specifically disallowed as far as I can see. >>> >>> What is at issue is what happens to content not visible on screen: the >>> Accessibility APIs flatten the content to string text, >> >> Note that no-where in the HTML spec does it say to treat @hidden, or >> otherwise invisible, elements differently. I.e. there are no >> difference in the normative requirements for an aria attribute that >> points to a @hidden element, from one that points to a non-hidden >> element. Hence I would expect them to behave the same. (Similarly, the >> spec doesn't say that browsers should behave differently on thursdays, >> hence I would expect browsers to behave the same on thursdays as it >> does on fridays). > > > "The hidden attribute is a boolean attribute. When specified on an element, > it indicates that the element is not yet, or is no longer, relevant. User > agents should not render elements that have the hidden attribute > specified... The hidden attribute must not be used to hide content that > could legitimately be shown in another presentation... It is similarly > incorrect to use this attribute to hide content just from one presentation — > if something is marked hidden, it is hidden from all presentations, > including, for instance, screen readers." > http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/editing.html Good point. I've updated my change proposal to change this text appropriately. Thanks! >> I'm happy to modify my change proposal to make this explicitly clear. >> I.e. add a normative requirement that says that browsers MUST expose >> the full semantics the description pointed to be aria-describedby, >> even when @hidden. > > We have aria-flowto as well. This should be covered by my change proposal now. Though it's technically separate from ISSUE-30. > Screen readers have access to the DOM. But ARIA is fairly young, and common > practices are still emerging. I'm not sure how this is relevant to this thread? If I'm missing something, please elaborate. / Jonas
Received on Sunday, 12 February 2012 12:55:59 UTC