Re: Split Issue 30?

On Feb 12, 2012, at 4:55 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:

> 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.

Since it turns out you have at least a bit of time to update your proposal, would you mind identifying a few specific use cases where your proposed change is a benefit? These need not be related to longdesc, in fact it might even be better if they are for contexts where longdesc could not be used, such as content that is not an <img>.

I think this would be really helpful if we move forward with splitting the issue, since the change to let aria-describedby point to hidden content would then need its own separate justification.

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 20:40:18 UTC