Re: Thoughts on roles and conformance to SC 4.1.1 Parsing

Hi Jonathon,

these sorts of markup patterns are HTML conformance errors, and for good
reason,  It is not a good idea period to use HTML elements contrary to the
rules of the HTML content models

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/introduction.html#restrictions-on-content-models-and-on-attribute-values

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>

On 21 August 2015 at 17:40, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
wrote:

> ARIA roles allow for flexibility in particular to correct semantic
> structure when it is incorrect and not easily changeable.  I wanted to get
> others opinions on situations where ARIA roles are mixed with semantic
> structures and the HTML nu validator indicates missing nesting structures.
> Accessibility support is also a related concern.
>
>
>
> For example, we have an unordered list with child elements that are not
> list items.  We then add an ARIA role to the list items.  We might end up
> with something like the below:
>
> <ul>
>
>   <p role=”listitem”>Apples</p>
>
>   <p role=”listitem”>Oranges</p>
>
>   <p role=”listitem”>Bananas</p>
>
> </ul>
>
>
>
> The opposite might also be true – say we have li elements within a div
> with role=”list”.  A similar situation often occurs with grid/table
> structures that have some table semantics but then use divs with
> “gridcell”.  So in regards to SC 4.1.1 what are your thoughts on mixing
> native structures with ARIA roles?  Would it be best then to reapply the
> default native semantic role?
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
>
> Phone 703.637.8957
> Follow us: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/#!/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter
> <http://twitter.com/#!/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog
> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter <http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
>
>
>