Re: First draft of ARIA 1.1. "text" role

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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>