Re: HTML 5 integration issues

> why are those posting about ARIA to the whatwg list NOT being 
> pointed to public-pfwg-comments? 
That's already happened. Maciej described his concerns in an email with 
PFWG CC'd. In addition, the folks on whatwg were given several ways to 
send in their question, but presumably are also busy with other things. If 
you look at the concerns they are legitimate. No one is saying don't use 
ARIA. However, they are saying please explain how ARIA semantics intermix 
with HTML semantics. So let's get to the business of sweeping our own 

There seem to be several fair questions:

1. Okay so ARIA is an override, but why is it allowed that ARIA is used on 
any element? Why not just div and span? That was isn't too tough to answer 
but we need to spell it out so people understand it.
2. If there is a container (such as an HTML tree grid) and the descendants 
mix similar ARIA and HTML semantics, how does that affect the 
interpretation of the semantics?
3. When do you need ARIA? How do you know if the native semantics are 
enough or not? In other words, if you have a dynamic list made with <ul>, 
do you need role="list"?

We need answers for these questions and then once we have them, ask that 
ARIA be included in the HTML spec. When we're ready it can be discussed on 

- Aaron

"Gregory J. Rosmaita" <> 
Sent by:
03/12/2008 05:38 PM
Please respond to

<>, <>, 
<>, <>
Aaron M Leventhal/Cambridge/IBM@IBMUS, <>
Re: HTML 5 integration issues

aloha -- since i forgot to change the file-type to plain text when i 
responded to aaron's emessage, the URI of the issue cited in my previous
post was NOT included in the archived post -- the URL is:

Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:

aloha, all!

aaron wrote, quote:
For LC I suspect that HTML 5 integration questions like the one Maciej had 

(and similar ones I saw on the whatwg list) will be asked of us.

why are such questions NOT being asked of PF through either the w3c-wai-pf
list, or -- better --, a publicly archived 
list...  why are those posting about ARIA to the whatwg list NOT being 
pointed to public-pfwg-comments? 

ARIA has already been held hostage to artificial constraints and outside
pressures -- while we must consider how ARIA will work within HTML5, the 
point of ARIA 1.0 is to deal with today's and yesterday's web, not the 
as-yet-undetermined tomorrow of HTML5 -- if HTML5 developers have problems
with ARIA, they should:

a) take them to PF via the public pf comments list

b) log all such concerns on an ARIA 2.0 issues list

c) not expect, nor demand, that ARIA's progress through W3C process is 
retarded by theoretical objections -- last time i checked, HTML5 is only 
in its first public working draft, there is very little consensus on many
key issues (forms anyone?) so HTML5 clearly has a dependency to BOTH 
support ARIA and to make as much of ARIA 1.0 redundant through native 

d) cease and desist spreading unfounded conclusions about ARIA and its 
relationship to HTML5 and to pose any queries about ARIA and HTML5 in 
the proper forum -- public-pfwg-comments or wai-xtech

ARIA 1.0 SHOULD not and MUST not be bound or limited by the gordian knot 
into which HTML5 is currently twisted -- yes, the question of integration
is important, but that discussion MUST be a dialog and not merely an 
extended inquiry into whether ARIA integration is worth the cost, in the 
words of HTML WG Issue 35:


"He who lives on Hope, dies farting."
  -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack
Gregory J. Rosmaita,
Camera Obscura:

Received on Thursday, 13 March 2008 15:48:04 UTC