- From: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 13:28:32 -0500
- To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>, "LWatson@PacielloGroup.com" <LWatson@paciellogroup.com>, Matthew King <mattking@us.ibm.com>, Joanie Diggs <diggs@igalia.com>
- CC: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>, "Gunderson, Jon R" <jongund@illinois.edu>, "public-pfwg@w3.org" <public-pfwg@w3.org>
Hi Alex, On 2014-11-26 10:28 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: > Can you think of use case where aria-activedescendant and aria-current > can be used for different elements of the same container? The example I gave using site navigation applies: http://idrc.ocad.ca/index.php/research-and-development/ongoing-projects. The site index can be navigated using up/down arrow keys, moving focus from link to link, but the "you-are-here" link doesn't change. Thus, "focus" is independent of "current" in the same container. Now, while the site doesn't use actually aria-activedescendant for focus traversal, it could. Which means aria-activedescendant and aria-current will be used for different elements in the same container. Furthermore, in this example, aria-activedescendant would be a property of the container element that holds all of the links, and it would point to the link with focus. In contrast, aria-current is property of one of the links, and not a property of the container: <div id="left-col" aria-activedescendant="item-2"> ... <ul> <li id="item-1">...</li> <li id="item-2"> ...</li> <!-- This is the active descendant --> ... <li id="item-42" aria-current="true"> ... </li> <!-- You are here --> ... </div> > Otherwise why would not extend meaning of aria-activedescendant to fit > aria-current needs like the attribute pointing to currently active > element? Because aria-activedescendant is about focus, whereas aria-current is about orientation. I don't think aria-current "points" to anything since it's just a boolean value. LĂ©onie, Matt, does it? > > There's some confusion with naming. Dominic suggest to rename it to > aria-active what makes it sound close to aria-activedescendant. That's an argument against naming it aria-active, since it could lead to author confusion as to which attribute to use where. > Joanie suggests to map it to ATK active state which is currently used > for active windows only. The ATK documents have been updated [1]. ATK_STATE_ACTIVE applies to more than windows. Furthermore, ATK_STATE_ACTIVE is distinct from ATK_STATE_FOCUSED and ATK_STATE_SELECTED. However, I see a problem. The latest documentation also says "ATK_STATE_ACTIVE should not be used for objects which have ATK_STATE_FOCUSABLE or ATK_STATE_SELECTABLE". But, that's ambiguous. It might be saying, "do not use ATK_STATE_ACTIVE for focus or selection states". Or, it might mean "something that is focusable or selectable can never have ATK_STATE_ACTIVE", which is counter to the site index example above. Joanie, can you clarify? > IA2 has active state that can be used both for windows or current > element within controls (i.e used for aria-activedescendant case). > Obviously current and active in a container concepts are close and > have a subtle difference (if they have). > [1] https://developer.gnome.org/atk/unstable/atk-AtkState.html -- ;;;;joseph. 'Array(16).join("wat" - 1) + " Batman!"' - G. Bernhardt -
Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2014 18:29:07 UTC