Re: Response to your comments on Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0

Dear Janina,

thank you for the WG's response. Yes, I am fully satisfied with your solution.



Ivan Herman
Tel:+31 641044153

(Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)

> On 24 Feb 2014, at 19:59, Janina Sajka <> wrote:
> Dear Ivan Herman:
> Thank you for your comments on the 6 February 2014 Proposed Recommendation
> of Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0
> ( The Protocols and
> Formats Working Group has reviewed all comments received on the draft. We
> would like to know whether we have understood your comments correctly and
> whether you are satisfied with our resolutions.
> Please review our resolutions for the following comments, and reply to us
> by 28 February 2014 to say whether you accept them or to discuss additional
> concerns you have with our response. If we do not hear from you by that
> date, we will mark your comment as "no response" and close it. If you need
> more time to consider your acknowledgement, please let us know. You can
> respond by email to (be sure to reference our
> comment ID so we can track your response). Note that this list is publicly
> archived.
> Please see below for the text of comments that you submitted and our
> resolutions to your comments. Each comment includes a link to the archived
> copy of your original comment on
> Note that if you still strongly disagree with our resolution on an issue,
> you have the opportunity to file a formal objection (according to 3.3.2 of
> the W3C Process, at
> to Formal objections will be reviewed during
> the candidate recommendation transition meeting with the W3C Director,
> unless we can come to agreement with you on a resolution in advance of the
> meeting.
> Thank you for your time reviewing and sending comments. Though we cannot
> always do exactly what each commenter requests, all of the comments are
> valuable to the development of Accessible Rich Internet Applications
> (WAI-ARIA) 1.0.
> Regards,
> Janina Sajka, PFWG Chair
> Michael Cooper, PFWG Staff Contact
> Comment 449: (Editorial) comment on ARIA PR
> Date: 2014-02-17
> Archived at:
> Relates to: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 <>
> Status: Accepted proposal
> -------------
> Your comment:
> -------------
> there was a great presentation at a workshop this week on the usage of ARIA
> at an educational publishing workshop; this prompted me to read the
> WAI-ARIA spec:
> I found, however, an editorial issue that, I think, should be dealt with
> before publishing it as a Rec.
> In the role model section:
> there is a repeated sentence describing values for properties:
>  "Any valid RDF object reference, such as a URI or an RDF ID reference."
> I am afraid this should be changed overall. The fundamental problem is that
> 'RDF ID reference' is _not_ an RDF concept. It is a (very!) unfortunate
> term used in a particular serialization of RDF, namely RDF/XML. @ID in an
> RDF/XML file is really identical to when @id is used in HTML: it defines a
> (fragment) URI. But this shorthand does not exists in, for example, the
> Turtle or JSON serialization of RDF.
> --------------------------------
> Response from the Working Group:
> --------------------------------
> We will update the references to be an IRI as you suggest.

Received on Monday, 24 February 2014 19:55:54 UTC