Re: Firefox accessibility API mapping questions

On 2015-03-26 9:03 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote:
> What you say makes sense, ...

Wonders never cease :-)

> ... but as long as it concerns to error handling it's not a big deal 
> from AT perspective which way we handle it.  ...

That's not what I'm told by one AT developer.  Having to deal with 
empty, non-signficant rowgroup accessibles is a pain, apparently. It 
clutters the accessibility tree with useless stuff.

> The implementation matters though. In Firefox we used to treat @role 
> attribute presence as indication of the accessible (except 
> role="presentation"), thus the requirement to not create an accessible 
> sounds like extra work for me.

So, always creating an accessible for rowgroup is because of 
implementation efficiency?  However, I'm a little confused since that is 
inconsistent with: "Firefox doesn't expose group accessibles for HTML 
tables like thead, tfoot or tbody in general ...".  Does FF *always* 
provide an accessible for "thead"?  Or only when it is focusable, etc.?

Thanks for the disussion and clarifications.

-- 
;;;;joseph.

'Array(16).join("wat" - 1) + " Batman!"'
            - G. Bernhardt -

Received on Thursday, 26 March 2015 13:42:12 UTC