Re: What do you think about the use of aria-label on elements with no role?

OK, so to make sure I understand, your proposal is:

* Change the ARIA spec to say that aria-label (and similar attributes) do
*not* apply to all elements in the base markup, only those without a
generic computed role
* Change all browsers to not expose names computed by attributes like
aria-label on such elements

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 1:31 PM, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:

> I have an action to include a ~“generic” role which would be the default
> for div. Once we have that, we can adjust it to match the name computation
> accordingly so that generic gets name from contents only.
>
>
>
> On Apr 6, 2015, at 1:21 PM, Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com> wrote:
>
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28413
>
> Developers are confused about what should happen if you put an aria-label
> on an element with no role, like an empty <div> element. While most
> browsers do interpret the aria-label and expose it, some screen readers
> ignore it. For example:
>
> <div aria-label="Label">Text</div>
>
> Firefox exposes "Label" as the accName, but "Text" as the IAccessibleText,
> and Windows screen readers read out "Text". Safari+VoiceOver is different,
> VoiceOver reads out "Label".
>
> Do you think the current Windows end-user behavior is correct, or not?
> Should we clarify the spec to make it crystal-clear that adding aria-label
> on any random element does not necessarily override that element's text, or
> should we change the current behavior?
>
> Note that elements without an ARIA role can still get a label, it depends
> on computed role, not the ARIA role. As an example:
>
> <h3 aria-label="ARIA Heading">Text Heading</h3>
>
> Every browser and screen reader combination I tested read out "ARIA
> Heading" here, not "Text Heading".
>
>