Re: Added ARIA to ARIA specs ACTION-691

One other note about a structural change I made to the ARIA spec 
associated with adding ARIA markup. In order for the W3C validator to 
accept it for publication, the document has to be HTML 5. HTML 5 is more 
strict about some things. For many of the tables of characteristics of 
roles, states, and properties, we have two columns, the first more or 
less a header, and the second the data. Previously I was told there were 
accessibility issues with marking that first column as a <th> and 
instead we used <td> with scope="row" to provide some degree of 
"header-ness" to it. However, HTML 5 does not allow the scope attribute 
on <td> elements. So I changed those to <th>. Please check this and let 
me know if this re-introduces accessibility issues that I don't 
understand. I would think it would be ok but I'm not a full-time AT 
user. Michael

On 13/01/2014 7:44 PM, Michael Cooper wrote:
> I've added ARIA markup to the ARIA and UAIG specs, and would like 
> review. This can be seen in the editors' drafts:
>
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/
>
> Overview of landmark roles I added:
>
>   * The W3C masthead at the top got role "contentinfo". That didn't
>     seem exactly right but I didn't find a better role. Because it's
>     info about that publication, not links to related docs,
>     "contentinfo" seemed more appropriate than "banner".
>   * The Abstract and Status got "complementary".
>   * The Table of Contents got "navigation".
>   * Everything after the TOC is wrapped in a big section with role "main".
>   * Notes got "note".
>   * On the page-per-chapter versions of the ARIA spec:
>       o The W3C banner at the top got "banner".
>       o The next / previous links got "navigation" - these links are
>         repeated at the top and bottom, I only put the role on the
>         first instance.
>       o The footer got "contentinfo".
>       o The content in between the header and footer got "main".
>
> Let me know if these assignments make sense, work as expected, and if 
> you see other spots I could have added landmark roles.
>
> Michael
>