W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2014

RE: Placeholder behavior

From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 15:06:58 +0000
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <b1d8a543cbfb43aa8716cc6b289102e2@BY2PR03MB272.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Ø  that is the difference between WCAG conformance and defining how an accessible name is calculated by browsers.
My recommendation would be to clearly identify which API mappings are “fallback” in the Platform Mapping Guide and all other documents so people creating sufficient techniques and failures can point to concrete information when indicating why a particular property is not sufficient or is sufficient.

Best Regards,

Jonathan

From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:00 AM
To: Jonathan Avila
Cc: Sailesh Panchang; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Alastair Campbell; Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group
Subject: Re: Placeholder behavior


On 7 October 2014 15:52, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>> wrote:
IMO something that is used for fallback purposes cannot be relied upon to provide an accessible name for conformance.  Thus, I think our overall message is confusing to people.

that is the difference between WCAG conformance and defining how an accessible name is calculated by browsers.

--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 15:07:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:16 UTC