- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 10:23:54 -0600
- To: Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "janina@rednote.net" <janina@rednote.net>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <public-pfwg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reHuBmwUP4BoSnJGRDhEtbH4ZCPyRXL_sx6LBicXHio1Yg@mail.gmail.com>
Matt, Thanks for your comments on the respec output. Since I maintain that let me address your comments specifically. On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com> wrote: > There is a lot of discussion of the text role, with which I still have > significant concerns, and of text related to aria-hidden. But, is consensus > on major changes in the spec required before a heart beat publication? If > so, I think there should be further discussion of the text role before > publication. > > I am also concerned with the accessibility of the spec itself. The respec > generated html needs quite a bit of work still. Perhaps it is fine to put > the heart beat out with such issues. I would rather we didn't. But, if it > is major work to correct them, it may be better to just get a draft out. > > Issues: > > 1. Section heading levels are not correct. Every section, regardless of > its level, has h2. So for example, sections5, 5.1, and 5.1.1 are all H2 > instead of H2, H3, and H4. > Actually, I disagree. Looking at the static version of the documents, each sub-level of heading has a higher numbered section. Section 5, for example, is an H2. Section 5.1 is an H3. This is not something we can change. We also have "H" elements on the role, state, and property definitions. These are not section headings - they are just definitions. They are currently H3, which is the same as the heading level of the section they are in. I imagine they could be increased to H4. Would that help? We can also have ReSpec add aria-level to each heading. It used to do that, but people complained that the levels were wrong. I can put it back easily enough. The problem is that in W3C specs the only "H1" is the title. Which is asinine, but there you are. So all the real section headers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) end up being aria-level 2. Which is silly from a table of contents perspective. So when I implemented it I put aria-level 1 on the top level (e.g., section 2), 2 on the next level, etc. Steve Faulkner and others objected to this, and the PF editors agreed that I should just remove it. So I have. Assuming we were to re-implement the use of aria-level on section headings, how would you like to see the levels expressed? > 2. the permalinks are included inside the heading tags. It would improve > readability if they were not a child of the heading. > For visual formatting purposes it would be challenging to pull them out of that tag. I will look at it though. > 3. Headings have aria-describedby pointing to the 1st paragraph after the > heading. I do not see the benefit. The downside is extra verbosity. I don't > think it models best practice to use aria-describedby in a document in this > way. > Actually, headings do not. Rather - some heading elements that are "definitions", as in of roles, states, and properties, have describedby. This is because they are "terms" and are being linked to their defining text. This is similar to a definition list where the DL and DT elements need to be connected in similar ways. If this is an incorrect usage, please bring it up to the PF Editor's Group. > 4. All the notes have heading tags. If the notes are going to have > headings, then I believe they should be a subheading under the heading of > the section in which they exist. For example, a note in a level 4 section > like 5.1.1 would have an H5. > Unfortunately, notes are a special class of animal and they don't get H* elements. They don't have a heading "tag". They do have a role of heading on the heading portion of the note. Sometimes the heading of a note just says "Note" - so that's sort of silly. But a note may have a more complex header (e.g., Note: some text about the note) in which case the role='header' indication might be more meaningful. > > Matt King > IBM Senior Technical Staff Member > I/T Chief Accessibility Strategist > IBM BT/CIO - Global Workforce and Web Process Enablement > Phone: (503) 578-2329, Tie line: 731-7398 > mattking@us.ibm.com > > > > From: "janina@rednote.net" <janina@rednote.net> > To: W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, > Date: 12/03/2014 10:37 AM > Subject: 48-Hour Call for Consensus (CfC); Publish 1 ARIA FPWD & 2 > ARIA Heartbeats > ------------------------------ > > > > Colleagues: > > This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to the Protocols and Formats Working > Group to approve publication of the following three ARIA related > documents: > > * A First Public Working Draft (FP:WD of the > > Accessible Name and Description: Computation and API Mappings > > https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/6cd22e8b0a834c4a54b7c6e4496a5887cc43f7ea/accname-aam/accname-aam.html > > * Updated (heartbeat) drafts of the following 2 documents: > > Core Accessibility API Mappings 1.1 > > https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/edfde333e76d19c4bf7a421978eaf89b7d9701e6/core-aam/core-aam.html > > Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.1 > > https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/eaf032dc62e0dc3c25b76db0f2300f972eff6977/aria/aria.html > > ACTION TO TAKE > > According to our agreed Consensus Procedures, this CfC is now open for > objection, comment, as well as statements of support via email. Silence > will be interpreted as support, though messages of support are certainly > welcome. > > If you object to this proposed action, or have comments concerning this > proposal, please respond by replying on list to this message no later > than 17:00 (5PM) Boston Time on Friday 5 December. > > Janina > > > -- > > Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 > > sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net > Email: janina@rednote.net > > Linux Foundation Fellow > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > Chair, Protocols & Formats > http://www.w3.org/wai/pf > Indie UI > http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/ > > -- > > Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 > > sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net > Email: janina@rednote.net > > Linux Foundation Fellow > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > Chair, Protocols & Formats > http://www.w3.org/wai/pf > Indie UI > http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/ > > > -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2014 16:24:24 UTC