Re: aria-kbdshortcuts property for review - ACTION-1642

I think the definition:

"Indicates keyboard shortcuts that can be pressed to activate widgets, 
such as a button, link or menuitem. Any widget that has a default 
activation behavior when clicked can have a keyboard shortcut."

Would be more clearly understood if written like:

"Identifies the keyboard keys the application captures in order to 
activate the widget. Any widget that has a default activation behavior 
when clicked, such as a button, link or menuitem, may have a value for 
aria-keys."

Writing it this way makes it more clear that this property is just 
documenting what the author has implemented in the application and that 
the property itself is not enabling any user-agent provided functionality. 
It also puts the statement in the active voice.

Matt King
IBM Senior Technical Staff Member
I/T Chief Accessibility Strategist
IBM BT/CIO - Global Workforce and Web Process Enablement 
Phone: (503) 578-2329, Tie line: 731-7398
mattking@us.ibm.com



From:   Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
To:     PF <public-pfwg@w3.org>, 
Date:   06/12/2015 08:43 AM
Subject:        aria-kbdshortcuts property for review - ACTION-1642



I have posted a branch with Rich's proposal for the aria-kbdshortcuts 
property:

https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/Keyboard_Shortcuts/aria/aria.html#aria-kbdshortcuts


A couple notes:
I made "must" to be RFC2199 MUST.
Because of this, the DOM Level 3 KeyboardEvent key Values spec needed to 
be a normative reference. We've avoided having too many normative 
dependencies, and while it's ok for now, ARIA 1.1 wouldn't be able to 
advance to Recommendation until that spec does. That may be appropriate, 
but I wanted to point it out.
After putting the property on the four roles listed in Rich's proposal, I 
note that it inherited into one role not listed in the proposal: switch. 
That's probably fine but wanted to make sure it was clear where it's 
inheriting into.
Michael