- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:07:53 +0100
- To: HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
- Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Leif Halvard Silli, Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:06:46 +0100: > Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> (1) @hidden (a boolean attribute) >> (2) style="visibitliy:hidden" >> (3) style="display:none" >> (4) @aria-hidden (not a boolean attribute) >> >> For example: does a combination of (1) or (3) with >> @aria-hidden="false" make any difference to just (3)? Should it? > > Good question. And one that I had myself. Within me I concluded that if > you do > > <img aria-describedby=desc> > <div id=desc hidden style='display:none'> > > then there would be no description - provided that full semantics means > that CSS is respected too. Hm - I think what I said above doesn't makes sense: Currently - without "the ISSUE-204 feature" - an AT would present the #desc element as pure text. Hence, in order to make the experience of the 'flattened' version of the #desc element and the 'un-flattened' as similar as possible, it doesn't make sense if "the ISSUE-204 feature" caused the #desc element to not be presented to the user. So, for the 'root' @hidden element - such as this #desc element in the above example - an AT with support for "the ISSUE-204 feature" should ignore the display:none. For children of the #desc element, then display:none would probably have to be ignored and/or perhaps non-conforming. -- Leif H Silli
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 16:08:35 UTC