RE: Is there an official place to document current role compatibility differences?

The format of the table looks decent (I am not sure why, but screen reader
support for the colspan scope in tables is decent (minus Voiceover
unfortunately), but no screen reader supports the rowspan scope, but that is
a topic for a different conversation).
I see the need for this kind of up-to-date information every day in my jobat
Deque, and I would be very happy to contribute to this work.
So you guys can definitely count on me for contributons of examles and
testing.
I am new to the group, so I do not know the processes of getting things
started yet. *grin* but I have seat on my pants, so I can learn to figure it
out.
Cheers
-B

-----Original Message-----
From: James Craig [mailto:jcraig@apple.com] 
Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2014 7:58 PM
To: Bryan Garaventa
Cc: Foliot, John; Cynthia Shelly; Birkir Gunnarsson; public-pfwg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?

Hi Bryan and John,

If you want to document something like this, please make it easy to edit (so
that it can be updated, as documents like this get out of date immediately)
and please put it under Working Group source control rather than on a
private or corporate site.

James


On Apr 5, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Bryan Garaventa
<bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:

> It sounds great, and I'd be happy to contribute. This is something I get
asked about on a regular basis, so if we could find a way to present it in a
way that is easy to track and make sense of, that would be awesome.
>  
> As far as presenting tabular data, what do you think of how this page is
set up?
> http://quirksmode.org/dom/core/
> Granted wiki formatting is different, but the table structure seems to be
well organized between the mainstream browsers.
>  
> If we could do something similar, where the column headers have the
various browsers, and the row headers are broken out between specific ARIA
constructs, we could track compatibility fairly easily.
>  
> We would probably need separate tables for Widgets, landmark/region roles,
and standalone properties, since Widgets would need to be fully interactive
constructs with specific role/state markup to provide accurate testing and
would need to be represented in two forms (child node navigation versus
container focus with aria-activedescendant), where this wouldn't be
necessary for landmark roles, or for standalone attributes like aria-label
on various element types.
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Foliot, John
> To: Bryan Garaventa ; Cynthia Shelly ; Birkir Gunnarsson ;
public-pfwg@w3.org
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 3:05 PM
> Subject: RE: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?
> 
> Hi Bryan,
>  
> Since CSUN, the effort has slowed, but I hope to re-start things very
shortly (everyone is welcome to contribute - it's on GitHub for a reason
<smile>).
>  
> The final outcome will be what I characterize as "big data" - there has
been no official decision on how to slice and dice that data, but with a
rich data-store of results, I am confident that others will be able to
extract all sorts of great conclusions and workable solutions - at least
that is my hope. If you have an idea on how to present some of the results
from that data-store, I encourage you to pursue that idea. However, at this
time, we lack the actual data, and are in the process of establishing the
framework and system to collect it.
>  
> I hope you can be a contributor!
>  
> JF
>  
> From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com] 
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 2:32 PM
> To: Cynthia Shelly; Birkir Gunnarsson; public-pfwg@w3.org
> Cc: Foliot, John
> Subject: Re: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?
>  
> Excellent, I'll clone the repo and check it out.
> do you know if the idea is to tabularize the results on a public page?
Visiting the wiki page has no data since Feb when it was last updated.
>  
> Thanks,
> Bryan
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Cynthia Shelly
> To: Bryan Garaventa ; Birkir Gunnarsson ; public-pfwg@w3.org
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 2:11 PM
> Subject: RE: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?
>  
> There is an effort to do just that underway, which started with a
hackathon at csun.
> http://john.foliot.ca/csun-2014-hackathon/
>  
> From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 9:36 AM
> To: Birkir Gunnarsson; public-pfwg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?
>  
> Personally I'd like it if there were cells for all mainstream browsers.
>  
> E.G
> http://quirksmode.org/dom/core/
>  
> This would make it easy to determine which roles were supported within the
various browsers, and if supported in a particular browser, where the ATs
still fall short in support, making it easy for browser and AT developers to
see where the shortfalls are.
>  
> Much of this information lives in our heads, but it's not that helpful
when we have to keep explaining this stuff from the start over and over
again, and we all have unique information we could add to this I think.
>  
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Birkir Gunnarsson
> To: 'Bryan Garaventa' ; public-pfwg@w3.org
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:55 AM
> Subject: RE: Is there an official place to document current role
compatibility differences?
>  
> Would such a table include both browsers as well as assistive technology
applications?
>  
> From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 10:51 AM
> To: public-pfwg@w3.org
> Subject: Is there an official place to document current role compatibility
differences?
>  
> Is there an official place, site, wiki, or other where current role
compatibility differences within AT/browser combinations can be documented?
>  
> It would be useful if there were a matrix document where, when differences
in support were discovered it could easily be noted within a table for this
purpose, as a running support compatibility table.
>  
> Does this already exist?
> This transmission may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the
information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and any attachments are believed to
be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system
into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the
recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted
by JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for
any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. If you received this
transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the
material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank
you.
>

Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 13:11:51 UTC