- From: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 16:19:24 -0400
- To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
- CC: W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>
Hey Alex. I myself don't see your proposal as particularly unreasonable, and unstable branch is unstable. So.... https://github.com/w3c/aria/commit/1d0bb68c. :) Let's see what others think. In the meantime, does that address your concerns? --joanie On 03/12/2015 03:50 PM, Alexander Surkov wrote: > Hi, Joanie. It seems that my concern I raised last time [1] is not yet > addressed. > Thanks. > Alex. > > [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Jan/0148.html > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com > <mailto:jdiggs@igalia.com>> wrote: > > Hey all. > > As per today's ARIA meeting, I updated aria-current in the spec to > reflect the text proposed by Matt and discussed on the 19 February > meeting. We stated today that the first note is not a note, but the > second and third notes are. I wasn't looking at the text closely when > this was agreed. Having looked at it closely, the second note strikes me > as something that really belongs as a normative statement: It's not > merely suggested that authors not substitute aria-current when > aria-selected is called for; authors SHOULD NOT make that substitution > (right?). So the commit I just made does that. As a result of not doing > what we discussed today, I'm flagging this for review. Let me know if > you want me to make it a true note. > > http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-current > > Thanks! > --joanie > >
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2015 20:19:59 UTC