- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 11:25:19 +0000
- To: Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Marco Zehe <mzehe@mozilla.com>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, Fred Esch <fesch@us.ibm.com>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <public-pfwg@w3.org>, "Schnabel, Stefan" <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=oPxL+s+x7nbMrak=BOPR3qe+iOTVTs506b8WAUEnhgw@mail.gmail.com>
The main issue is that <img> is a void element. If image was like this: <img> alt text </img> we would not have a problem, we could just use role=presentation. <img role="presentation"> alt text </img> but that ship sailed long ago. -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 12 November 2014 10:50, Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Marco, aria-labelledby or aria-label only takes the place of the contents > of an element if the role specifies that accessible name is from contents. > In the definition of role presentation, it is clear that span is redundant > with or equivalent to presentation. > Role presentation specifies that the accessible name comes from author. > So, based on this, aria-label on a span would "supplement" the content of > the span, not replace it. > > The spec is silent about elements that don't have an implied aria role, > for example paragraph. I can not find anything in the spec that says what > should be done with an aria-label on a paragraph. There is probably some > phrase buried in there someplace that covers it. > > On the other hand, consider list item, heading, button, and link. These > are examples of roles where the spec is clear that aria-label would > replace the content. > This is a sometimes useful but nonetheless dangerous aspect of ARIA, and I > have, like probably most of us screen reader users, experienced its > unintended consequences to devistating effect at times. > > 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: Marco Zehe <mzehe@mozilla.com> > To: "Schnabel, Stefan" <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>, "lisa.seeman" < > lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, > Cc: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, "White, Jason J" < > jjwhite@ets.org>, Fred Esch/Arlington/IBM@IBMUS, Matthew > King/Fishkill/IBM@IBMUS, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, > Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats < > public-pfwg@w3.org> > Date: 11/12/2014 01:52 AM > Subject: Re: First draft of ARIA 1.1. "text" role > ------------------------------ > > > > Well if I remember correctly, it has always been said that if something > has an aria-label* construct, it should be prioritized over any normal text > that might also be there. If some AT vendors don't honor that, or only > honor it if some random selection tells it to, that's not a problem of the > ARIA spec and doesn't need an extra role. If an extra would be what is > needed to make it more palpable to somebody, then we do have a problem, but > not a technical one, but an evangelism one. Because, turning things on its > head, a role does not necessitate an aria-label* construct. In other words, > an aria-label* construct can exist without a role, and should be treated by > ATs accordingly. Likewise, the presence of a role does not mean there > always has to be an aria-label* construct, and ATs should not stop looking > for other means of a name just because there is a role set. > > If we suddenly started to require a role always be present if an > aria-label* construct is, and vice versa, it defeats the premise that ARIA > is an addition where the host language falls short. Because if the host > language already provides the correct semantics for a role, which it does > in your example, or for a given widget role, the mechanics of the host > language provide the correct name already, there is no need to use the > other respectively. It would only over-complicate things unnecessarily and > lead to code that is bigger than it needs to be. > > And, as Lisa pointed out already, things should not become more > complicated for the average web developer and consultant as it already is. > You, Stefan, will probably get it right if we did this, I would, too, and > presumably everybody else on this list. But the potential for mis-use of > even more roles and stuff is so big that I am really scared. In my opinion, > this has the potential to be misused just as much as role "application". > > Marco > > On 12.11.2014 10:38, Schnabel, Stefan wrote: > Hi Marco, > > because (as I have written) from an implementers viewpoint, adding a > “trigger“ or a member in the list of > roles where ARIA labelling has to be supported (which is what they > actually do for some but not all roles) is maybe on a higher acceptance > level. > > However, > > <span role=”application” aria-label=”Out of stock – That is Critical” > style=”color:red”>Out of Stock</span> > > will work already, too, but role=application will be likely deprecated in > ARIA 1.1. > > Regarding your last post: Applause for the FF / NVDA support of this but I > do not see any contradiction in emphasizing by role that something is more > than just plain text. > > Best Regards + Troll Greetings > Stefan > > > *From:* Marco Zehe [*mailto:mzehe@mozilla.com* <mzehe@mozilla.com>] > * Sent:* Mittwoch, 12. November 2014 10:28 > * To:* Schnabel, Stefan; lisa.seeman; James Craig > * Cc:* Cynthia Shelly; White, Jason J; Fred Esch; Matthew King; Steve > Faulkner; Joanmarie Diggs; W3C WAI Protocols & Formats > * Subject:* Re: First draft of ARIA 1.1. "text" role > > Hi Stefan, > > OK, trolling back: > What makes you think they'll support role="text" if they don't get aria > labelling right now? > > Marco > On 12.11.2014 10:04, Schnabel, Stefan wrote: > Hi Marco, > > I’m in the mood for some trolling since I don’t understand sometimes > implementation logic behind. > > Can you please go ahead and tell FS that they should support aria-label > (or labelledby, describedby) e.g. in > > <span aria-label=”Out of stock – That is Critical” style=”color:red”>Out > of Stock</span> > > in ALL their modes (important!) according to the ARIA spec WITHOUT having > a role applied on the span or on the body? > > If they refuse, having > > <span role=”text” aria-label=”Out of stock – That is Critical” > style=”color:red”>Out of Stock</span> > > will make things clearer for the screen readers that there is more than > just plain text .. namely ARIA-attributed text. > > Best Regards > Stefan > > *From:* Marco Zehe [*mailto:mzehe@mozilla.com* <mzehe@mozilla.com>] > * Sent:* Mittwoch, 12. November 2014 09:24 > * To:* lisa.seeman; James Craig > * Cc:* Cynthia Shelly; White, Jason J; Fred Esch; Matthew King; Steve > Faulkner; Joanmarie Diggs; W3C WAI Protocols & Formats > * Subject:* Re: First draft of ARIA 1.1. "text" role > > +1000 to that, Lisa! Given the history of the web, I think it is safe to > assume that everything that is nothing else is text, and that text does not > need its own role. None of the examples I have seen in this thread > convinced me that this is either necessary nor in any way helpful. > > Marco > > > On 12.11.2014 07:48, lisa.seeman wrote: > My 2 cents > Each new role we introduce will create a learning curve for authors, many > of whom will initially apply it incorrectly, killing the user experience, > until an accessibility consultant tells them how to use it correctly. > (Assuming the consultant is not also using it inappropriately - this is not > to be taken for a given.) I say this based on a lot of personal experience. > > If we do not need a new role we should not create it. > > > All the best > > Lisa Seeman > > *Athena ICT Accessibility Projects * > <http://accessibility.athena-ict.com/> > *LinkedIn* <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, *Twitter* > <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa> > > > > > ---- On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 05:15:29 +0200 *James Craig**<jcraig@apple.com>* > <jcraig@apple.com> wrote ---- > > > On Nov 11, 2014, at 5:41 PM, Cynthia Shelly <*cyns@microsoft.com* > <cyns@microsoft.com>> wrote: > > > > I wonder if it might make more sense to change the definition of > presentation or none to cover this scenario > > > > <p>I <img src="heart.gif" alt="love" role="none"> New York.</p> > > > > to read "I love New York" instead of "I New York" > > As Matt alluded, the ARIA 1.0 "presentation" role ("none" is a 1.1 synonym > role of "presentation") does not expose any attribute or role semantics, so > this would not expose the text alternative. > > > The glyph scenario is different, because it is text, and is often read > as a single character. > > I don't think it'd always be limited to a single character. > > > But, do we need a role for that? Would this work instead? > > > > <p>I <span aria-label="love">♥</span> New York.</p> > > The role of the span is ambiguous here. Some platforms don't expose the > span at all, preferring to flatten the selection string, so there is no > element on which to hang the label. (Though that might just be an > implementation detail.) > > James > > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2014 11:26:27 UTC