W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [webcomponents] Custom Elements Spec

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 05:09:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnb78hPK27acvDTtoAaC4w7inpP0WNT+DV00kTmuah_tcifSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@chromium.org>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> If there's better ways we should certainly consider them. We have to bear
> in mind though that fallback is something most authors don't spend much
> time on, so the ideal is that having good fallback is _easier_ than not
> having fallback. We should definitely not end up in a state where you have
> to do _extra_ work to get fallback. (This is one of the big problems with
> the way the ARIA spec is designed; it assumes that authors are going to
> first spend loads of effort making a widget out of <div>s, and _then_
> they're going to do even _more_ effort to annotate it with ARIA roles. We
> don't want to end up in that kind of situation.)

Yeah, I am similarly pessimistic that relying on ARIA to make
components accessible is not going to work. That is, it could work if
people used it, but given the complexity of doing so the common case
will be inaccessible components. And that's bad.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 03:09:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:34 UTC