Re: Extension specifications / modules vs. ARIA Core (ACTION-1618)

Shane,

I anticipate that the SVG a11y task force will want to create new roles for
objects in graphics. We imagine the roles will be needed for navigation and
assistive technologies. I doubt graphics roles will extend existing roles
as graphic and charts in particular have their own terms and uses.  For
instance some roles we may want are data, axis, legend, label, scale,
symbol and a few more.  These things have semantic meaning in charts, maps,
blue prints and STEM graphics. Making graphics roles extend existing aria
roles which relate to web pages would be forced and unnatural.

                                                              
                                                              
                    Regards,                     Fred         
                                                              
                   Fred Esch                                  
       Accessibility, Watson Innovations                      
    AARB Complex Visualization Working Group                  
                     Chair                                    
        W3C SVG Accessibility Task Force                      
                   IBM Watson                                 
                                                              
                                                              






From:	Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
To:	"W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <public-pfwg@w3.org>
Cc:	"'Protocols and Formats Working Group WG'" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>,
            "public-dpub-aria@w3.org" <public-dpub-aria@w3.org>
Date:	04/16/2015 11:12 AM
Subject:	Extension specifications / modules vs. ARIA Core (ACTION-1618)
Sent by:	ahby@aptest.com



Folks,

(Apologies for the CC list.  PF's issue tracker only monitors the
non-public list.)

This came up again today in the DPub call.  I would like to have the PFWG
take some time on an upcoming agenda to formally resolve how modules are
developed and how those modules relate to the core document(s).  In order
to get the discussion started, I propose that we adopt the HTML Working
Group's model for Extension specifications as a basis [1].  My translation
of their rules into our context would be:
   1.	Anyone can start working on an extension / module.
   2.	At some point an extension should be exposed to the broader (ARIA)
      community for socialization / comment / approval.
   3.	If the community ultimately finds an extension interesting, it can be
      formalized and merged into the core spec or left as an independent
      specification.
   4.	In either case, if an extension eventually becomes (part of) a W3C
      Recommendation, then it's normative non-optional components are
      required for every conforming implementation (hand-wave about
      versions and synchronization - TBD).
   5.	The earlier a group starts coordinating with the PFWG in their
      development process, the more likely it is that there will be a
      smooth transition into the W3C and its Recommendation Track.
      However, there is no guarantee this will happen.
>From a technical perspective I would propose:
   1.	Acceptable extensions MUST conform to and MAY extend the existing
      taxonomy.
   2.	Any new roles MUST be a descendant of a role or roles in the ARIA
      Core. To promote faster adoption, new roles SHOULD be a descendant of
      a role or roles in the current ARIA Core W3C Recommendation (as
      opposed to a future version of that Recommendation).
   3.	Any new states or properties MUST be very carefully coordinated with
      the ARIA Core development group as well as user agent and AT
      implementors.
   4.	Roles/State/Properties that are named in a scoped manner
      (myvocab-myrole) are more easily adopted than ones that are in an
      unscoped space (myrole).
   5.	Extension specification developers are responsible for providing the
      specification, use cases, and conformance tests.
Opinions?

[1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ExtensionHowTo

--
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.