Hi Lisa (or anyone else who knows) How do the new personalization semantics of coga-* vs uia-* relate to one another. Is UIA-field just an update to COGA-field or is there something new happening here? Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> twitter.com/davidmacd GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> * Adapting the web to all users* * Including those with disabilities* If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Longer term the idea is to use the personalisation semantics, which is to > one side of ARIA: > > https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics- > content-1.0/#field-explanation > > > > E.g. > > <input type="text" name="fname" *aui-field="phone"*/> > > > > But that’s hot off the press (13th Feb), not sure about support yet. > > > > -Alastair > > > > > > *From: *Joshue O Connor - InterAccess > > > > Yeah - thanks Alastair and David. Good feedback both. > The reason I ask is that a lot of people will think that they can add just > add ARIA to satisfy this SC > and in some cases, as David mentions for inputs, it may be doable but in > others not. > > Good catch both about the AccName and the label - and we don't want that > to be overridden etc. > > IMO We'll need to be clear in our materials about where ARIA anti-patterns > would not satisfy this SC. > > Thanks > > Josh > > >Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2018 15:46:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:22 UTC