Re: a few suggestions on marking up comments [WAS Is the current definition of the article element in HTML useful?]

I would say that the second example of Steve's test page is a good way to go. If we state in the spec what kind of elements can reside in the <ul> or <ol> it doesn't have to promote usage of other elements  ( then <li> or <article> ) in a list…

Cheers,

Wilfred Nas

@wnas
wilfred@wnas.nl
wnas.nl
+31(0)6 2426 9159

On Jan 25, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:

> Steve Faulkner wrote:
> “I have sketched out a few possibilities:
> 1 conservative, 1 less so.
> 
> http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/comments.html”
>  
> The conservative option probably makes the most sense. It’s familiar territory for developers, a comment thread is a collection of items, and it also provides another way for AT users to discover the number of items in the collection.
>  
> Having something like:
>  
> <h2>38 comments</h2>
>  
> Makes that information easily discoverable visually (and that’s a good thing), but it’s possible a screen reader user would bypass the heading (if they were navigating the page by list for example). By wrapping the comment thread in a list, for example:
>  
> <h2>38 comments</h2>
> <ul>
> <li>Comment 1</li>
> <li>Comment 2</li>
> …
> <li>Comment 38</li>
> </ul>
>  
> A screen reader would also be told “List of 38 items” on arriving at the top of the list. Belt and braces is often a good thing.
>  
> I agree with Ian’s point that an ordered list might sometimes make sense, unless comments were deliberately jumbled of course.
>  
> Léonie.
>  
> From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 25 January 2013 11:38
> To: HTMLWG WG
> Subject: a few suggestions on marking up comments [WAS Is the current definition of the article element in HTML useful?]
>  
> I have sketched out a few possibilities:
> 1 conservative, 1 less so.
> 
> http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/comments.html
> 
> 
> regards
> SteveF
> 
> 
> On 23 January 2013 10:41, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think the definition of the article element in HTML [1] is overly
> vague and broad, which leads to intended and unintended use that
> undermines its usefulness as a semantic construct for users that
> actually consume its semantics such as screen reader users.
> 
> For example, the spec promotes the use of article as a container of,
> well, an article and also for each instance of a comment on an article
> (example: [2]).
> Yet there is no defined method of exposing the semantic differences
> between an article in the common understanding of the term and when
> used as defined in the broader HTML definition.
> 
> I suggest that the authoring advice and requirments in regards to the
> article element need to be reviewed and perhaps modified in light of
> usage data [4], how the semantics are exposed and conveyed in user
> agents, issues articulated in articles and blog posts (example: [3])
> on how to use it and feedback from users and developers.
> 
> 
> 
> [1]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/sections.html#the-article-element
> [2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/07/tories-laughing-again-deborah-orr
> [3] http://html5doctor.com/designing-a-blog-with-html5/
> [4] http://www.html5accessibility.com/HTML5data/article/
> --
> with regards
> 
> Steve Faulkner
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> with regards
> 
> Steve Faulkner
> Technical Director - TPG
> 
> www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
> HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
> Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html