Re: aria-interactive and the authoring/debug process problems

I think of aria-interactive as one step forward to custom roles since it is
a way to describe roles. I think I agree that new widget - new role
approach would be preferable as the new role is completely spec'd out and
reusable, but it probably doesn't work for the web diversity.

To address the authoring errors problem, we may not allow to override
interactive value on certain roles.
14 мая 2015 г. 3:35 PM пользователь "Gunderson, Jon R" <jongund@illinois.edu>
написал:

>  I understand the desire to reduce the number of roles in ARIA, but I
> have concerns that using aria-interactive attribute to achieve this goal
> will probably be detrimental to learning, authoring and debugging.
>
>
>
> Think of people looking at a DOM inspector and it says role=”gridcell”,
> but the accessibility API represents it as role=”td”.
>
>
>
> What role does a validation or visualization tool report to the user (e.g.
> GRIDCELL or TD)?
>
>  If it is TD then the developer will not find a role=”td” in their DOM
> inspector view
>
> If it is gridcell then the definition of gridcell has to be more
> complicated to discuss that it is sometimes interactive and sometimes
> static based on an ancestor role of aria-interactive.  It sounds simple,
> but I think this will cause a lot of authoring errors, debugging problems
> and messaging complexity.
>
>
>
> I think role values should not be able to switch between interactive and
> non-interactive based on attribute values, that should be a fundamental
> part of a role.  ARIA is hard enough for developers to understand, making
> some roles change from interactive to non-interactive based on attribute
> values will add to the complexity of learning and using ARIA.
>
>
>
> My two cents,
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>