Re: Implementation bugs (present and anticipated) with aria-owns in tabular containers

Not sure I get the point but number of tbody in the table shouldn't affect
on table interface, "put them wherever in the DOM you want" is ambiguous as
it doesn't describe the way how tbody and table are linked.
Alex.

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com> wrote:

> Hey Alex.
>
> On 03/31/2015 10:42 PM, Alexander Surkov wrote:
>
> > that's the point, it doesn't matter how browser implements aria-owns,
> > the table interface should just work.
>
> Phew! :)
>
> > I meant it seems to be the easiest approach to make all stuff working
> > because aria-owns affects on events, group information, table interface
> > and whole bunch of other things. If aria-owns altered the tree then the
> > browser implementation can get all these stuff for free. If accessible
> > tree alteration doesn't harm the assistive technology then we should be
> > in good shape to make it. Iirc IE does this. So I lean towards to make
> > same in Firefox.
>
> If changing the tree will by side effect fix the accessible table
> interface implementation, then does that mean your answer to the
> question I asked about tbody [1] is un-numbered option 3, namely:
>
> <quote>
> ... it's no problem to have however many tbody instances you want,
> and put them wherever in the DOM you want, (because) the accessible
> table interface implementation for that table will work as expected for
> each platform
> </quote>
>
> If so, cool. :)
>
> --joanie
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Apr/0005.html
>