SVG AAM feedback part 1

Amelia,

The change starting on line 611 about role none.

If the first mappable role provided by the author is none or presentation,
the element must not be exposed. However, note that a number of features of
an element, such as interactivity, can cause an author-supplied role of
presentation to not be mapped.

I think you need to repeat none in the second use so folks do not think
none and presentation have a different affect.

Using the term to not be mapped and where the link takes you is odd. I
thought the link would take me to a definition of to not be mapped. Instead
it goes to ARIA presentation role.  I find the term to not be mapped
confusing in this use since role none  and role presentation use the phrase
will not be mapped in the opposite sense - that is the element won't be in
the accessibility tree. Where as your usage is saying the element will be
in the accessibility tree. I also get the sense that the statement allows a
non-none or non-presentation backup role for none/presentation be used
because the first mappable role failed.  Instead, I suggest the sentence.

If the first mappable role provided by the author is none or presentation,
the element must not be exposed. However, note that a number of features of
an element, such as interactivity, can cause an author-supplied role of
none or presentation  to be ignored.


The change starting on line 626.

In all cases, an element with not be excluded if it can currently receive
focus based on user interaction. Consult the original document [CORE-AAM]
for the normative text.

Typo with  want will

A tabindex of -1 cannot currently receive focus, but I would hate to see
elements in a chart enter and leave the accessibility tree as a polyfill
toggles tabindex values to perform better navigation.  I prefer

In all cases, an element will not be excluded if it has a tabindex, can
receive focus based on user interaction or has an aria property that
triggers inclusion in the accessibility tree. Consult the original document
[CORE-AAM] for the normative text.


Question about special cases in 5.1.1 Excluding Elements from the
Accessibility Tree
There are two special cases listed with bullets
      a value of hidden for the visibility property
      a value of none for both the fill and stroke properties of text or
      shape elements

Is there a special case for mesh?

I don't think we should include/exclude shapes in the accessibility tree
based on style (fill and stroke) because:
   It assumes data in the accessibility tree must be tied to what is
   visible on the screen
   It assumes that if a user can't see an object, the object has no
   significance to a user (ie by not showing Ohio on a map it gives
   Michigan a bigger chance to win the big 10 - note, the maps they sell
   like this haven't helped so far)
   It will be a huge burden on user agents to calculate (ie calculating
   whether Alaska is included will take checking it's 2000 islands)
   Animation could affect the presence  in the accessibility tree (during
   the animation) of an item that starts and ends in the accessibility tree
   or vice-versa.
   Animation performance could be significantly impacted if the user agent
   tries to keep the accessibility tree up to date with animation.









                                                              
     Regards,                                                 
                                                              
    Fred Esch                                                 
 Watson, IBM, W3C                                             
  Accessibility                                               
                                                              
 IBM Watson       Watson Release Management and Quality       
                                                              






From:	Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
To:	Fred Esch/Arlington/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:	SVG-A11y TF <public-svg-a11y@w3.org>
Date:	05/17/2016 02:52 PM
Subject:	Re: Reminder no meeting this week



FYI, I also compiled some changes to the SVG-AAM based on various issues
we've talked about the past few months.

Pull request is here: https://github.com/w3c/aria/pull/373

~Amelia

On 17 May 2016 at 10:16, Fred Esch <fesch@us.ibm.com> wrote:
  All,

  Just a reminder there is no SVG accessibility task force meeting this
  week. Use the time to read the SVG authoring guidance so we can discuss
  it next week. Also look over the Graphics Module, Amelia made changes
  that we talked about last week. If you have suggested changes please put
  them on list.

  Our next meeting will be May 25, 2016.




                                                     
     Regards,                                        
                                                     
    Fred Esch                                        
 Watson, IBM, W3C                                    
  Accessibility                                      
                                                     
 IBM Watson       Watson Release Management and      
                  Quality