RE: Counter Proposal Re: ISSUE-204: aria-hidden - Chairs Solicit Proposals

Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> I agree with the basic premise of harmonising the latest revisions to
> ARIA and HTML5, but I suggest either dropping or properly documenting
> your references to accessibility APIs, since as I've pointed out
> before your claims about their limitations appear to be incorrect and
> this could cast doubt on the credibility of your proposal if this goes
> to poll.

Hi Ben,

I did consult with Rich Schwerdtfeger* about this directly, to be both sure and clear of the assertions made. If you have documented proof that something stated is incorrect I would welcome that documentation. I know that in the past you pointed out discrepancies between the ARIA Spec and ARIA Implementation guide, and those were forwarded to the ARIA WG and they both reviewed and corrected at the PW F2F In Austin earlier this month. Changes have been made to the Implementation Guide.

If you are aware of further discrepancies between how and what the specification states, please do bring that to the attention of the ARIA Working Group. If there are bugs in how certain browsers may currently process ARIA rules, I would suggest that they are browser bugs which should be filed with the browsers.



* Rich has been at the forefront of ARIA development and documentation, serving as:
  - Former Editor of the WAI-ARIA 1.0 W3C Candidate Recommendation,
  - Former Editor of the WAI-ARIA 1.0 Authoring Practices Working Draft, 
  - Editor of the Roadmap for Accessible Rich Internet Applications, 
  - the former (Aaron Leventhal) and current (Andi Snow-Weaver) Editor(s) of the WAI-ARIA 1.0 User Agent Implementation Guide were/are IBM employees who report to Rich.

Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 13:40:04 UTC