Procedural Request [Was: Minutes for ARIA telecon on 9

In-Reply-To: <>
X-Operating-System: Linux 3.11.6-201.fc19.x86_64

When we get into good detail discussions like this, can we please also
adjust the email Subject: ??

That would be very helpful 4-6 weeks/months/years from now as needs
arise for forensic reads of the archives.

Just your procedural nudge acting up again!


Joseph Scheuhammer writes:
> I wrote:
> >Of these, seven fail, namely, 627 - 631, although testing of those
> >cases is sparse -- I'll try to find time to fill in the ATK/AT-SPI
> >column for these seven.
> There is another wrinkle.  These test cases fail not because step 2b
> is problematic, but because in this sub-case, the spec improperly)]
> discusses embedding an menu control.  It should have been embedding
> an menu *button*.  That was a goof, and will be addressed in ARIA
> 1.1; see ACTION-1154, "Re move 'If the embedded control is a menu,
> use the text alternative of the chosen menu item.'from Name
> Computation, as it would be a menu button or popup button, not the
> menu itself." (
> Also, test case 631 involves an embedded input type="file".  I
> believe we decided that this was invalid since a file input does not
> render as a simple atomic control and/or is rendered differently on
> different browsers.  FF, for example, renders it as a "Browse ..."
> button followed by static text that is the file name of the file
> chosen.
> I don't think these issues, which are specific to one sub-clause of
> step 2b, make the entire step at risk.
> -- 
> ;;;;joseph.
> 'A: After all, it isn't rocket science.'
> 'K: Right. It's merely computer science.'
>              - J. D. Klaun -


Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats
	Indie UI

Received on Monday, 9 December 2013 22:22:28 UTC