W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pfwg@w3.org > March 2014


From: <jason@accessibleculture.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 18:13:30 +1300
Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, Rich Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, David Bolter <dbolter@mozilla.com>, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown.idi@gmail.com>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-Id: <72986327-6395-4F8B-AE98-A9EB8749F051@accessibleculture.org>
To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
Hi Alexander,

On 4/03/2014, at 10:50 am, Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi. I don't see any practical benefits of dropping BSTR hack. Also I would avoid to wake up a sleeping dog, I'm not sure who may have dependencies on it.

I guess the question for me is more whether or not the mapping guide should be specifying and recommending a hack that is implemented by one or two browsers (are there others that use this hack?) and discouraged by the keepers of the MSAA spec. I’ve understood the guide to be recommending mappings first, and documenting what certain browsers do second, and only to the degree that what these certain browsers do aligns with or informs the recommended mappings. 

Also, even if the mapping guide dropped the hack, that wouldn’t force Firefox to do so.



> Thanks.
> Alexander.
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:18 PM, jason@accessibleculture.org <jason@accessibleculture.org> wrote:
> Looking for folks’ opinions on how we relate, in the HTML to accessibility API mappings, Firefox and Chrome’s use of VARIANT to return the tag name as string (BSTR) for elements without established roles in MSAA.
> I think we had decided at one point that since this approach isn’t “described by the MSAA specification”, we wouldn’t indicate or promote it as a preferred mapping in the actual mapping tables, but instead just include a note about it [1]. The note exists [2], but we still have this use of BSTR noted in the MSAA + IA2 mappings themselves, for example, see the mapping for abbr [3].
> Am I right in thinking, one, that Mozilla is looking at dropping the “BSTR hack” [4], and two, that the individual element mappings for MSAA + IA2 shouldn’t include this use of BSTR?
> Cheers,
> Jason
> [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16769#c3
> [2] http://rawgithub.com/w3c/html-api-map/master/index.html#use-of-msaa-variant-by-some-user-agents
> [3] http://rawgithub.com/w3c/html-api-map/master/index.html#el-abbr
> [4] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=798492
> Jason Kiss
> jason@accessibleculture.org
> http://www.accessibleculture.org

Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2014 05:14:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:45:01 UTC