Re: svg accessibility tests

Hi Fred.

As I emailed you privately, I have put your meeting on my calendar. But
I am afraid I fail to see how the decision about testing has anything to
do with my question, which I'll re-state here for convenience:

   Is it accurate to say that with respect to role values of
   "presentation" and "none," SVG should be treated no differently
   than any other host language?

To be clear: Given that my impression had been that the "golden hammer"
would likely be the will of the group, the current WebKit code
implements the "golden hammer" for SVG, overriding what is done for
other host languages. I have since learned from your email that you
"lost the golden hammer argument." As a result, the current WebKit code
is now incorrect. It will be incorrect regardless of what decisions are
made around testing. :) Thus I need to fix this now-incorrect code. I've
set aside time to do so today.

If the task force has not yet reached definitive consensus about the
"golden hammer," I can of course hold off on completing this work. On
the other hand, if it has reached a consensus on the "golden hammer," I
might as well fix this bug today.

Thanks!
--joanie

On 03/29/2016 11:57 AM, Fred Esch wrote:
> Joanie,
> 
> If you can come to the Wednesday task force meeting 2pm Eastern, you can
> get the conformation. Linux and Mac testing are on our agenda and it
> would be nice if folks could ask you questions about the tests, how they
> work, coverage, etc. If we can get the group to accept the testing
> instead of manual testing, it will reduce our manual testing effort by
> half.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Fred Esch
> Watson, IBM, W3C Accessibility
> IBM Watson	Watson Release Management and Quality
> 
> 
> 
> Inactive hide details for Joanmarie Diggs ---03/29/2016 11:42:48
> AM---Hey Fred, all. Thanks for the update. Is it accurate to sJoanmarie
> Diggs ---03/29/2016 11:42:48 AM---Hey Fred, all. Thanks for the update.
> Is it accurate to say that with respect to role
> 
> From: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
> To: Fred Esch/Arlington/IBM@IBMUS
> Cc: public-svg-a11y@w3.org
> Date: 03/29/2016 11:42 AM
> Subject: Re: svg accessibility tests
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Fred, all.
> 
> Thanks for the update. Is it accurate to say that with respect to role
> values of "presentation" and "none," SVG should be treated no
> differently than any other host language? If so that's an easy change.
> Before I make it and ask for code review, please confirm that my
> understanding is correct.
> 
> Thanks!
> --joanie
> 
> On 03/24/2016 10:26 AM, Fred Esch wrote:
>> Joanie,
>>
>> I made significant changes to two sets of tests - tests in Role is none
>>
> <https://www.w3.org/wiki/SVG_Accessibility/Testing/Test_Assertions_with_Tables#Role_is_none>
>> and Role is presentation
>>
> <https://www.w3.org/wiki/SVG_Accessibility/Testing/Test_Assertions_with_Tables#Text_Elements_role_.3D_presentation>
>> . In the tests you probably copied, I had elements that had a child
>> and/or attributes that would normally cause the element to be in the
>> accessibility tree and a role of none or presentation. I did this to
>> test the golden hammer (role none). I lost the golden hammer argument
>> and it is considered an error (invalid SVG) to have a role
>> none/presentation with a child and/or attributes that cause the element
>> to be in the accessibility tree. So I dumbed the test down making the
>> test with naked elements (no child and/or attributes that would cause
>> the element to be included in the accessibility tree) so the tests has
>> valid SVG.
>>
>> Your layout tests may need similar changes. Sorry :(
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Fred Esch
>> Watson, IBM, W3C Accessibility
>> IBM Watson Watson Release Management and Quality
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2016 16:29:20 UTC