W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pfwg@w3.org > September 2013

Re: ARIA Test Cases 86 and 87 are invalid

From: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 09:21:10 -0400
Message-ID: <523C4BC6.5030101@alum.mit.edu>
To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
CC: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, David Bolter <dbolter@mozilla.com>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>
Hi Alex,

Two questions.  You wrote (my emphasis):

> when focused
> item is changed then previously focused (unfocused) item gets
> aria-selected="false", currently focused item gets
> aria-selected="true", in other words, *only focused item is selected*.

This discussion is within the context of a container that supports 
multiselection -- the second table in section 5.8.3 [1].  If only the 
focused item is selected, that sounds like a single selection scenario.  
How does "selection follows focus" work in a context where multiple 
items can be selected?

Secondly, I outlined a script to switch the sense of aria-selected based 
on focus events:

> One possibility is if the author adds an onfocus script that sets 
> aria-selected to "true"

Does that qualify as a "selection follows focus" scenario?

-- 
;;;;joseph.


'A: After all, it isn't rocket science.'
'K: Right. It's merely computer science.'
              - J. D. Klaun -
Received on Friday, 20 September 2013 13:21:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:26 UTC