RE: WG discussion: Nov 5, 2013: role=group technique

We should be developing this stuff with the concept to provide sufficient information for AT to use, not what current AT capabilities are.  Driving it from the AT capabilities is a roadmap for disaster, just as, in general, using AT as the primary measuring stick is a narrowly scoped answer.  Personally I need to get more deeply geekish on ARIA so probably need to get cracking today.  

I think my challenge with the whole WCAG procedure is the distinct discussions around requirements, sufficient techniques, failures, and test processes which often are so imprecisely defined as to be useless in any real test environment, with an expectation people get the same answers more than once.  I believe a far more synchronized process has to happen for updating sufficient techniques, failures, and test processes--as if even one tiny thing is out of place it invalidates almost the whole set.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Bailey, Bruce [] 
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 7:03 AM
To: Sailesh Panchang
Subject: RE: WG discussion: Nov 5, 2013: role=group technique

Thanks Sailesh.  I thought aria role=presentation causes AT to ignore the element.  So would this not hide the table and the content therein?

-----Original Message-----
From: Sailesh Panchang [] 
Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 7:54 PM
Cc: Bailey, Bruce
Subject: Re: WG discussion: Nov 5, 2013: role=group technique

With respect to your comment on use of role=presentation on the table with credit cards in example#2:
It is a layout table and role=presentation helps to remove any ambiguity in its interpretation by AT.
NVDA, for instance will expose it as a table in FF if the role is absent.


Received on Monday, 25 November 2013 15:07:53 UTC