Re: The 9 Citations Buttressing HTML's Issue-204

Forwarding the attached to PF's Public 
Comments list in order that we can be sure to consider whether our ARIA
documents are correctly conveying ARIA, inasmuch as the HTML-WG has
reached conclusions different from PF's based on the citations included
below.

Janina

Leif Halvard Silli writes:
> Janina Sajka, Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:07:42 -0500:
> 
> > and reached such a markedly different conclusion from that
> > of the ARIA Task Force itself,
> 
> Conclusion about what? 
> And where is the ARIA Task Force' conclusion w.r.t. ISSUE-204? In the 
> ARIA specs, you mean?
> 
> I offer comments to the urls you pointed. See below.
> 
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#include_elements
> 
> This confirms that elements with @hidden must not be included in the 
> a11y three. The HTMLwg is in violent *agreement* with ARIA on this, as 
> much as I can see.
> 
> > 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_additional_relations_reverse_relations
> > 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_additional_relations_reverse_relations
> 
> This seems quite important - so I quote: 
> 
> "Note that aria-describedby may reference structured or interactive 
> information where users would want to be able to navigate to different 
> sections of content. User agents MAY provide a way for the user to 
> navigate to structured information referenced by aria-describedby and 
> assistive technology SHOULD provide such a method."
> 
> This quote *does* say that AT/UA should make available to the user the 
> interactive and structured semantics of an section that 
> aria-describedby points to.
>   
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_role_table
> 
> No comment.
> 
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#Descriptions_external
> 
> Quote: "if you wish to reference an external resource with 
> aria-describedby, you can reference a link that in turn references the 
> external resource"
> 
> And then it offers this this example, which I simplify for brevity:
> 
>    <img src=histogram
>        alt="Histogram of Blackberry tree heights"
>        aria-describedby=longdesc >
>    <a id=longdesc href=link target=_description>Histogram data</a>
> 
> 
> Comment: I have earlier proposed to change this text - even to remove 
> it - because it did not speak to the facts. But now, I have heard from 
> Jonas, that this technique already works, for visible elements. [Though 
> when I asked, he did not point me to a particular build of Firefox for 
> testing.] What ISSUE-204 promises is that what the ARIA Practises 
> document here describe for a link without HTML5's @hidden attribute, 
> would also be possible for a link with HTML5's @hidden attribute.
> 
> BUT NOTE: The link inside this example could very well be hidden, 
> despite the fact that does not have aria-hidden=true. For instance: It 
> might have been placed off-screen via CSS. The example does not say 
> anything about this. [But note that ARIA 1.0 says that when an element 
> is hidden, then it should have aria-hidden=true. So it is quite 
> possible that this element should have had that. Because, as long as it 
> is not hidden, it would be read read twice by the AT: Once when 
> presenting the aria-describedby relationship and once when the 
> rendering proceeds to the next element,after the <img>.]
>  
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#Descriptions_tooltip
> 
> Hm. I guess a role=tooltip element could contain a link to a long 
> description ...
> 
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout_remaining_description
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout_remaining_description
> 
> Quote: "This is unlike longdesc which typically requires the author to 
> create a separate file to describe a picture." 
> 
> Comment: Longdesc does not 'typically require this' - it is just that 
> longdesc typically is *used* that way.
> 
> Quote: "It is preferable to have the descriptive text in prose as well 
> so that it is readily available to all users"
> 
> Comment: Question: Why is it preferable, when this could lead to 
> repetition? At any rate: That it is preferable, means that the text 
> take account for the fact that some will hide the description.
> 
> Quote: "This is the preferred vehicle for providing long descriptions 
> for elements in your document. … snip … aria-describedby can also be 
> used to point to a link to another page"
> 
> Comment: The sections discusses @longdesc many times. But says that 
> @aria-describedby is the preferred method for long descriptions inside 
> the document. And, despite that it claims that @longdesc's primary role 
> is to point to other documents, it does demonstrate how to do the same 
> with @aria-describedby. 
> 
> This document several times demonstrates how to use the alt attribute 
> correctly. BUT NOT A SINGLE TIME DOES IT DEMONSTRATE HOW TO USE 
> @longdesc - not even when it speaks about pointing to external 
> documents.
> 
> The elephant in the room .... No! The elephants - in plural. If the 
> ARIA Task Force has reached a 'different conclusion' about - hm - 
> @longdesc, then it has done its best to hide it.
> 
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/states_and_properties#aria-describedby
> 
> No comment. But I would like to also point to ARIA 1.0's section on 
> Text Alternative Computation:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/roles#textalternativecomputation
> 
> quote: "Skip hidden elements unless the author specifies to use them 
> via an aria-labelledby or aria-describedby being used in the current 
> computation."
> -- 
> Leif Halvard Silli

-- 

Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200
  sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net

Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org 
Linux Foundation  http://a11y.org

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Monday, 5 March 2012 03:07:24 UTC