Re: @inert and @aria-inert for disambiguating modal states

Of course I don't think that SVG has to copy all HTML features, afaik SVG
can be combined with HTML markup at some level so HTML @inert could do a
job for SVG too. On the other hand if SVG needs some feature then I'd say
it's worth to add it. After all ARIA is just about semantics for assistive
technology while @inert is about UI.

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
wrote:

> ARIA does not just apply to HTML. It also applies to SVG and MANY elements
> formerly limited to HTML are now showing up in SVG. While I agree with you
> to a point Alex we need to think beyond just the HTML host language.
>
> Are you proposing that every host language duplicate all HTML features?
> ... just asking. I am copying the public pfwg list.
>
> Rich
>
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Alexander Surkov ---10/16/2014 08:04:51
> AM---Hi, Jason. In general ARIA shouldn't duplicate every sin]Alexander
> Surkov ---10/16/2014 08:04:51 AM---Hi, Jason. In general ARIA shouldn't
> duplicate every single HTML piece otherwise we
>
> From: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
> To: Jason Kiss <jason@accessibleculture.org>
> Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, PFWG <
> w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
> Date: 10/16/2014 08:04 AM
> Subject: Re: @inert and @aria-inert for disambiguating modal states
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi, Jason.
>
> In general ARIA shouldn't duplicate every single HTML piece otherwise we
> get into the word where HTML serves presentational needs while ARIA servers
> for semantics. In this particular case it means I prefer to have HTML5
> @inert attribute over @aria-inert. You referred to [1] which claims that
> @inert was removed because it's not supposed to be used in no context of
> HTML5 dialog element. I don't have any contrary instance so that rationale
> looks reasonable with me. Getting back to ARIA, it provides role="dialog"
> however it doesn't have a way to specify the dialog modality. @aria-inert
> could be used for that but that doesn't look like a nice approach, it also
> makes ARIA markup farther from HTML. I think I would prefer if
> role="dialog" carried some extra attribute for modality stuff.
>
> In short I'm up to @inert attribute if it has use case. I don't think I
> see a good reason why ARIA would need @aria-inert.
>
> Thanks.
> Alexander.
>
> [1] *https://html5.org/r/8536* <https://html5.org/r/8536>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 9:08 PM, Jason Kiss <*jason@accessibleculture.org*
> <jason@accessibleculture.org>> wrote:
>
>    The PFWG is seeking feedback from the HTML Accessibility Task Force on
>    the appropriate accessibility API mapping for an @aria-inert attribute
>    for inert subtrees, and to reconsider the potential of the HTML
>    "inert" attribute.
>
>    The PFWG recently discussed a possible ARIA property, "aria-inert", to
>    help disambiguate modal states, for example to programmatically
>    establish that the underlying content "behind" a modal dialog is inert
>    and cannot be interacted with, even if it is visible [1].
>
>    The group was considering how such an attribute would map to
>    accessibility APIs, and it was noted that HTML used to include an
>    "inert" attribute, but it was removed [2]. It's noted that there
>    remains a section on "inert subtrees" in both the HTML5 PR [3] and the
>    HTML5.1 nightly [4].
>
>    The general consensus in the group is that HTML's @inert was somewhere
>    in between @aria-disabled and @aria-hidden. Mapping to @aria-disabled
>    is not appropriate because @aria-disabled applies to the current
>    element and focusable descendant elements only, not all descendant
>    elements. Mapping to @aria-hidden, which, depending on the browser
>    implementation, effectively removes the content from the accessibility
>    tree, supports a semi-modal behavior of dialogs and menus, but is not
>    quite correct because the underlying content "behind" the dialog or
>    menu is actually rendered and visible, and this may have implications
>    for some assistive technology like screen magnifiers.
>
>    Other use cases for @inert or @aria-inert include carousels where you
>    interact with one pane at a time but you can still see these other
>    panes even though they're not active. Even if those inactive panes
>    were marked up using @aria-hidden, there would still need to be a way
>    to handle the focusability. Pop-up menus present another use case
>    where sometimes the background might be inert, depending on the
>    platform.
>
>    Without @inert, and were @aria-inert to exist, it could have
>    backwards-compatibility so that elements with both aria-hidden="true"
>    and aria-inert="true" would be exposed as "inert, but not actually
>    hidden." An author could use both to ensure the modal state worked in
>    browsers that supported @aria-inert, and older browsers that only
>    supported @aria-hidden.
>
>    Members of the PFWG will chime in if I've misrepresented any aspect of
>    their discussion on this question.
>
>    Jason
>
>    [1] *http://www.w3.org/2014/06/23-aria-minutes.html#item01*
>    <http://www.w3.org/2014/06/23-aria-minutes.html#item01>
>    [2] *https://html5.org/r/8536* <https://html5.org/r/8536>
>    [3] *http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/editing.html#inert-subtrees*
>    <http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/editing.html#inert-subtrees>
>    [4]
>    *http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/editing.html#inert-subtrees*
>    <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/editing.html#inert-subtrees>
>
>
>