ARIA host language integration -- please clarify wording or intent from Jim Jewett on 2009-09-29 (public-pfwg-comments@w3.org from July to September 2009)

From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:43:01 -0400
To: public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <fb6fbf560909291343t5329bfb8m80eb06f748a971b0@mail.gmail.com>

Near the end of section 1 ( http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/#usecases ), it says:

    ARIA is intended to be used as a supplement for native
    language semantics, not a replacement. When the host
    language provides a feature that is equivalent to the ARIA
    feature, use the host language feature.

Please add the clarification "authors SHOULD"

    ARIA is intended to be used as a supplement for native
    language semantics, not a replacement. When the host
    language provides a feature that is equivalent to the ARIA
    feature, authors SHOULD use the host language feature.

Reason:  In the HTML Working Group, a number of comments have been
made based on the understanding that ARIA annotations should be not be
available to scripts or CSS unless they conflict with the default
semantics of the element.  There was even some concern about defining
the semantics in terms of aria roles/properties/states, because those
were somehow reserved for non-standard uses.

-jJ

Received on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 20:43:58 UTC