Re: HTML-A11Y Task Force Consensus on Issue-204 (Updated)

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On May 24, 2012, at 12:54 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 23, 2012, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com> wrote:
>>> While allowing UAs to expose the accessibility tree of @hidden content
>>> is great, I think we should make it a MUST level requirement.
>>
>> My understanding is that some AT implementors believe it would be
>> difficult to comply with such a requirement. That said, I agree that we
>> should encourage UAs to expose the tree to AT if they are able to. Would
>> a SHOULD work for you?
>
> So far I haven't seen such feedback from any implementor. I've only seen me
> and Maciej speak up on this and we've both said that implementation-wise
> this is similar to exposing an accessibility tree for the contents of
> <canvas> elements. Certainly not trivial, but doable and something that
> needs to be solved in order to make canvas accessible (which I hope we agree
> should be a MUST level requirement).
>
> However I could easily have missed other implementor feedback. If that's the
> case a SHOULD level requirement might be ok. But I'd be curious to hear how
> that implementor was planning on dealing with canvas.
>
> At the recent F2F, Microsoft representatives said that they believed
> exposing full semantics for aria-describedby content would be very hard to
> do in IE (in combination with the mainstream screen readers on Windows).

Hard enough that they oppose a MUST requirement?

Does this also mean that they oppose a MUST requirement for exposing a
full accessibility tree for content inside of <canvas>?

/ Jonas

Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 17:53:33 UTC