W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2015

Re: DPUB module comments

From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 01:39:30 -0700
Cc: Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, mgylling@idpf.org, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, tsiegman@wiley.com
Message-Id: <594CB0AE-5AB4-47E3-A349-978CC1CB9C4F@apple.com>
To: Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@bell.net>

> On Mar 10, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@bell.net> wrote:
> 
> More thoughts below...
>  
>> Is there a reason that a document using DPUB roles can not use standard ARIA roles when they apply?
>  
> My understand is that the DPUB roles are complementary, so it’s not a choice of one or the other.

This is correct, but as such DPUB should not duplicate an ARIA role if a suitable one exists.

>> In the case of "landmarks" role, the description perfectly matches the standard "navigation" role. So, why not just use role="navigation"?
> 
> I think that might be more a failing of the definition. In epub, the landmarks navigation is special in that it is required to be flat and every link must carry a semantic identifying the structure it points to. It’s sort of like declarative markup for special behaviours.

Might DPUB define this as an id? Is there any time where more than one would exist per HTML resource file? If not, try:

<nav id="landmarks"> (implicit navigation role on <nav> element; IDREF for the DPUB semantics.)

> I’d be more inclined to find a way to make the list redundant, like merging with toc, than use a generic role like navigation. If we go that route, it seems problematic to figure out which navigation element to use.

Ditto here: <nav id="toc">

James
Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2015 08:39:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:12 UTC