Re: Applicability of native semantics when ARIA roles used

On 24/08/2017 14:52, Jonathan Avila wrote:
> Leonie, thanks for your feedback.  The ARIA in HTML document indicates " Adding an ARIA role overrides the native role semantics in the accessibility tree which is reported via the accessibility API, and therefore ARIA indirectly affects what is reported to a screen reader or other assistive technology."  This would seem to imply adding the role could change the nature of the element.  Thoughts?

The browser parses the element first and populates the various values it 
exposes. ARIA then overrides specific things (like the role). The end 
result is exposed via the accessibility tree/interface. i.e. the 
presence of ARIA does not change how the browser originally 
parsed/interpreted the element itself.

At least that's my understanding.

> I think we would both agree that <div role="img" alt="text"></div> is a failure

As per the above, the browser itself doesn't start looking for the alt 
attribute after it sees that a role="img" was set, and that's why this 
is a failure.

> but adding ARIA states and properties to an HTML element like <button aria-pressed="true">Toggle</button> is valid and desirable.
> 
> Anyone else feel strongly about the case of img with role img and alt?

Not sure there is a case to be made there - or rather (assuming my 
understanding of how the browser first parses and then 
backfills/overrides based on ARIA is correct) the above needs to be 
noted in the spec?

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Thursday, 24 August 2017 15:25:51 UTC