RE: aria-level a required property for role="heading" or a supported property with an RFC SHOULD for authors

Right, which again leads me to believe that this 'error' is not critical -
it can be recovered from and still deliver usable and useful information to
the end user. 

 

This is why I am suggesting SHOULD language contextually: "Authors SHOULD
provide a value for aria-level" (but not "Authors MUST provide a value for
aria-level") - we have demonstrable use-cases where that kind of stance
might actually introduce as many issues as it may resolve.

 

JF

 

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:schwer@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 2:30 PM
To: John Foliot
Cc: 'Joseph Scheuhammer'; 'Cynthia Shelly'; 'David Bolter'; 'Dominic
Mazzoni'; 'James Craig'; 'WAI Protocols & Formats'; 'Alexander Surkov'
Subject: RE: aria-level a required property for role="heading" or a
supported property with an RFC SHOULD for authors

 

Yes, but lack of a level provides no level context and it does not align
well with an HTML document whose native elements ALL provide a level. The
question is not what the default behavior is when you leave it off but
rather what we should be requiring authors to do. I think Mac does the best
you can do in the absence of a level. 


Rich Schwerdtfeger

"John Foliot" ---06/18/2015 04:19:55 PM---+1, I have previously suggested
that this is the better response (holy cow James, we're going 2 for

From: "John Foliot" <john.foliot@deque.com <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com> >
To: "'James Craig'" <jcraig@apple.com <mailto:jcraig@apple.com> >, "'Joseph
Scheuhammer'" <clown@alum.mit.edu <mailto:clown@alum.mit.edu> >
Cc: "'WAI Protocols & Formats'" <public-pfwg@w3.org
<mailto:public-pfwg@w3.org> >, "'Dominic Mazzoni'" <dmazzoni@google.com
<mailto:dmazzoni@google.com> >, "'Alexander Surkov'"
<surkov.alexander@gmail.com <mailto:surkov.alexander@gmail.com> >, "'David
Bolter'" <dbolter@mozilla.com <mailto:dbolter@mozilla.com> >, "'Cynthia
Shelly'" <cyns@microsoft.com <mailto:cyns@microsoft.com> >
Date: 06/18/2015 04:19 PM
Subject: RE: aria-level a required property for role="heading" or a
supported property  with an RFC SHOULD for authors

  _____  




+1, I have previously suggested that this is the better response (holy cow
James, we're going 2 for 2 :-) ). 

Leonie did some very quick real-time testing during our call, and (she will
correct me if I am wrong) she noted that in Firefox with NVDA (?) when the
level was not specified, it defaulted to "level 2" (which I think is a wrong
decision). Not sure where that decision is happening however, but suspect
it's in the screen reader.

JF


> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Craig [mailto:jcraig@apple.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 2:14 PM
> To: Joseph Scheuhammer
> Cc: WAI Protocols & Formats; Dominic Mazzoni; Alexander Surkov; David
Bolter;
> Cynthia Shelly
> Subject: Re: aria-level a required property for role="heading" or a
supported
> property with an RFC SHOULD for authors
> 
> VoiceOver used to speak "Heading Level 0, text content" but we fixed that
a few
> years ago. It now speaks "Heading, text content"
> 
> James
> 
> > On Jun 18, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu
<mailto:clown@alum.mit.edu> >
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2015-06-18 3:06 PM, Bryan Garaventa wrote:
> >> Just to simplify my view, if heading levels are optional, ATs and
browsers will
> never provide consistent UIs, because they will always do something
different by
> guessing.
> >
> > Tangent:  What do Chrome, FF, IE, and Safari, do, in fact, when faced
with
> "heading", but no aria-level?  For example,
> >
> > <div role="heading>...</div>
> >
> > How is the level property mapped?
> >
> > --
> > ;;;;joseph.
> >
> > 'Array(16).join("wat" - 1) + " Batman!"'
> >           - G. Bernhardt -
> >
>