- From: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 22:15:15 -0500
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: public-aria@w3.org, Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, James Teh <jamie@nvaccess.org>, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, public-svg-a11y@w3.org, Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
Anne, I had not been to the SVG working group meetings of late as the meetings were scheduled at a time I could not attend. I see the group made a significant change here in that it went back to using namespaces for HTML features like Iframe so that you can add all of HTML. Regardless, it is a lot easier for the author to add a role than to add a namespace for HTML and a prefixed HTML figure element when all you want is the role semantics. ARIA initially had namespaced role values and they were not favored by browser community. We should probably add something to the SVG accessibility API mapping spec. to refer to the HTML AAM for those namespaced elements. The accessibility people want to use semantics consistently across host languages. There is a place for both. Rich Sent from my iPad On Sep 14, 2016, at 3:45 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: >> The SVG accessibility effort does not want to piece part chunks of host language elements in the middle of an SVG document which needs to stand alone. Not all SVG documents are embedded in HTML. So, sticking an HTML figure element inside of an SVG document is a non-starter. > > This seems diametrically opposed to the efforts of the SVG WG, who no > longer wish to duplicate HTML efforts and are working on making it > easier to use both together. I don't understand why the SVG > accessibility effort would chose a different direction from the SVG > WG. > > (Sorry if this email breaks threading. I'm not subscribed and the > mailto URLs on the mailing list archives may or may not have done the > trick.) > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 16 September 2016 03:15:47 UTC