- From: Ian Pouncey <w3c@ipouncey.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:25:44 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ian Pouncey <ian@ipouncey.co.uk> Date: Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:22 PM Subject: Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) draft comments To: public-pfwg-comments@w3.org EOWG discussed http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-20100916/complete in our Oct 22nd conference call (http://www.w3.org/2010/10/22-eo-minutes.html), here are our comments. # Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 ## WAI-ARIA abbreviation We felt that in places marking up WAI-ARIA as an abbreviation in every instance was causing a great deal of visual clutter, the last paragraph of 1.1 is a good example of this where the term is used 7 times. Solution: * Use abbr element for each occurrence, but only use title attribute for the first in each section * Do not use title attribute if name is already expanded in text follow this principle for other abrreviations and acronyms. ## Link to "WAI-ARIA Overview" In 1. Introduction, please change from http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria/ to http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria ## Make 'role' definition more understandable in isolation We felt that the definition of 'role' at http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-wai-aria-20100916/terms#def_role, which is linked to from 1. Introduction, is not clear enough to be of use at this point in the document. If the reader needs to refer to the definition of role it is unlike that the current definition would help them. ## 'non-disabled user' reference In 1.1. Rich Internet Application Accessibility, paragraph 3, there is the following text: 'To a non-disabled user, it may look and act like a collapsible tree widget...'. We feel that this is not appropriate as it suggests that all disabled people are visually impaired who require WAI-ARIA to deal with widgets that have their used described visually. We would prefer the following to replace this sentence: 'To a person using a visual browser it may look and act like a collapsible tree widget, but without appropriate semantics, the tree widget may not be perceivable to or operable by a person using a screen reader or other assistive technology that does not recognize the role.' ## Longer description required for figures Figures such as Figure 1 in 1.1. Rich Internet Application Accessibility are introduced with explanatory text in the preceding paragraph, but this text does not fully describe the image, for example it lacks the list of the Accessibility APIs which is contained in the image. This content needs to be available in text form within this document. ## h1 vs div In 1.4. Co-Evolution of WAI-ARIA and Host Languages, paragraph 2 there is the sentence 'For example, it's better to use an h1 element in HTML than to use the heading role on a div element.'. We would like this to be more strongly worded in favour of using the semantic h1. The document as a whole makes it clear that WAI-ARIA is not a replacement for semantic markup, but we felt this was a bit ambiguous. ## Assistive technologies examples For 4. Important Terms we would like to give further input on the AT section based on documents EOWG is currently writing. Additionally we would like a link to 'How people with disabilities use the web' which is currenlty being updated by EOWG: http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web. ## Host Language Semantics We felt that the last two sentences of 7.5. Conflicts with Host Language Semantics made this section less clear, is this level of detail required in this document? ## Document focus some EO participants the scope of this should be focused on what developers want, and the User Agent comments in the User Agent guide. While well written it is a very large and information dense document, and we feel that this separation would make it more usable for the target audience. ## Style consistency Consider using styles from WAI WCAG 2 ## Link styles Visited definition links are black making it hard to distinguish these links after they have been followed. -- Important notes: * Many in EOWG did not have the chance to review this draft. Please let us know when there is an updated Editors' Draft that we can review before Last Call. * Most of the issues above were discussed in one EOWG teleconference, and a few added as these were being typed up. They do not necessarily represent consensus among all of EOWG.
Received on Friday, 12 November 2010 14:26:20 UTC