- From: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:59:38 -0700
- To: "Sailesh Panchang" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I agree, it would be good if FS simply fixed the issue. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sailesh Panchang" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com> To: "Steve Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Cc: "Bryan Garaventa" <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>; "Charles McCathie Nevile" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>; "Ian Yang" <ian@invigoreight.com> Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 2:30 PM Subject: Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and HTML5 <main> element > With reference to Bryan's comment re. JAWS' bug in dealing with form > controls within role=main region and Steve's response with a fix at > http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/div-landmark.html > > I think it is a bad idea to use role=form within role=main simply to > fix a JAWS'bug. > The issue should be taken up with FS and FS should resolve the issue. > It makes no sense to code > <form role="form" ...> > That's not what WAI-ARIA is meant for. > The FORM element has existed since the dawn of HTML, so why is > role=form required? > Also Refer: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AR/comments/details?comment_id=399 > Sailesh Panchang > > > On 3/24/13, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Bryan, >> >> this is a known BUG in JAWS, here is a work around for it: >> >> Annoying JAWS 13 + IE 9 ARIA landmark role on div element >> bug<http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/div-landmark.html> >> >> with regards >> >> -- >> SteveF >> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html> >> >> >> On 24 March 2013 02:40, Bryan Garaventa >> <bryan.garaventa@whatsock.com>wrote: >> >>> ** >>> I have experimented with role="main" in the recent past as well, and >>> it's >>> come up in obscure ways with various clients in the last year as well >>> when >>> trying to diagnose weird accessibility issues regarding ARIA. >>> >>> I understand the theory, and I even tried to implement role="main" on >>> WhatSock.com, but the results were not as good as I hoped from what the >>> intended purpose of the role states it to be. >>> >>> Here is a simple example of this regarding form fields contained within >>> a >>> region with role="main". >>> >>> <div role="main"> >>> >>> <form> >>> >>> <input type="text" title="Full name" /> >>> >>> <input type="text" title="Email address" /> >>> >>> </form> >>> >>> </div> >>> If you are in Forms Mode in JAWS 13 when using IE, you will here >>> "Landmark >>> Region" in addition to every form field label spoken when pressing Tab, >>> and in JAWS 14 you will hear "Region", which is distracting and quite >>> annoying when dealing with forms that involve more than twenty fields in >>> number for instance. >>> >>> I've also noticed strange behaviors when other roles are nested within >>> role="main", as well as when interactive widgets are present such as >>> role="tablist", and many others. Some of the behaviors I've seen include >>> the automatic announcement of everything contained within the region of >>> role="main" when dynamic content changes occur within a localized >>> section >>> of another widget also contained within this broad container. >>> >>> So, after I added role="main" to WhatSock.com, I found all of these >>> issues, and immediately removed it. >>> >>> Since then, I'm not a fan of adding attributes just because there is a >>> specification that promotes it, without performing comprehensive testing >>> to >>> verify it beforehand. >>> >>> This is something I recommend everyone do, because I have diagnosed many >>> website issues that are directly a result of developers adding ARIA >>> attributes to their markup without have any idea how it will impact >>> screen >>> reader interaction and feedback. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> >>> *To:* Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru> >>> *Cc:* Ian Yang <ian@invigoreight.com> ; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 23, 2013 7:14 PM >>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" >>> and HTML5 <main> element >>> >>> Hi Chaals, >>> >>> thanks for the detailed reply to Ian, the apparent terseness of my own >>> reply was based on the knowledge of Ian's (Yang) being involved in much >>> of >>> the discussion[1] that occurred on the WHATWG list on the subject, and >>> in >>> fact being the person who triggered my renewed interest in the >>> development >>> of the feature. >>> >>> >My conclusions are that differences in the WHAT-WG version are silly, >>> > but >>> the element as specified in the HTML specification and as commonly >>> >implemented is actually very useful. >>> >>> It should be noted that the differences (with the W3C definition) in how >>> main has been defined in the whatwg spec have not been ignored. I have >>> sought to understand what the reasoning for those differences is [2] and >>> also asked Ian (Hixie) directly on IRC, but have not as yet received any >>> response. >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/search?type-index=public-whatwg-archive&index-type=t&keywords=maincontent&search=Search >>> [2] >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2013Feb/0172.html >>> >>> with regards >>> >>> -- >>> SteveF >>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >>> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html> >>> >>> >>> On 24 March 2013 00:33, Charles McCathie Nevile >>> <chaals@yandex-team.ru>wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:21:17 +0100, Steve Faulkner < >>>> faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Ian, >>>>> >>>>> Ian Hixie, he mentioned that the existence of the ARIA landmark role >>>>>> "main" is a mistake >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> I've seen this assertion from him, and discussions about why. I am >>>> unconvinced by the arguments I have seen. I also haven't seen anything >>>> that >>>> reasonably contradicts the data Steve produced to justify the element. >>>> My >>>> discussions with web developers, from small-shop devs to things like >>>> Yandex >>>> with millions of users across dozens or hundreds of services suggest >>>> that >>>> the element makes sense. >>>> >>>> That's very thought-provoking >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Well, it might be. The original proposal was thought-provoking enough >>>> to >>>> also provoke me into reading other people's thoughts and research and >>>> even >>>> doing a small amount of my own. My conclusions are that differences in >>>> the >>>> WHAT-WG version are silly, but the element as specified in the HTML >>>> specification and as commonly implemented is actually very useful. >>>> >>>> The fact that Ian disagrees with something isn't enough to be >>>> though-provoking on its own. He is clever, and often right. But not >>>> about >>>> everything. Some of his insights into accessibility are very helpful, >>>> and >>>> some of them just suggest that he knows more about other aspects of >>>> HTML. >>>> >>>> >>>> both role=main and now <main> are part of the web platform and >>>>> interoperably implemented across browsers and assistive technology >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, and this happened very quickly. That doesn't necessarily mean they >>>> are a good idea, because sometimes the wisdom of the crowd isn't quite >>>> as >>>> clever as we hope, but it suggests that a large proportion of the >>>> relevant >>>> decision makers, who on balance are usually quite smart and quite >>>> thoughtful about what they add to the web, are convinced that the >>>> element >>>> makes sense. >>>> >>>> A major reason for the element is to replace the "skip to main content" >>>> links that are all over the web, for accessibility purposes. While the >>>> use >>>> of those links is a terrible bit of architecture (they only work if you >>>> start from the top of the page and navigate with the keyboard, etc etc) >>>> they are deemed useful enough to include on all kinds of websites whose >>>> designs have been through multiple rounds of usability testing to >>>> ensure >>>> they make sense in practice. >>>> >>>> There have been discussions in all kinds of places. Since Steve was the >>>> big proponent, he can probably provide pointers by digging through his >>>> email archive, but I suggest you look at the mail archives of the W3C's >>>> HTML Working Group[1], the W3C's HTML Accessibility Task Force[2] in >>>> particular. You can also look at things like IRC logs, blog posts, and >>>> so >>>> on. A Yandex search [3] shows a handful of interesting perspectives in >>>> blogs and articles, too. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-html/<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/> >>>> [2] >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-html-a11y/<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/> >>>> [3] http://yandex.com/yandsearch?**text=html5+main+element&clid=** >>>> 1823140&lr=213<http://yandex.com/yandsearch?text=html5+main+element&clid=1823140&lr=213> >>>> >>>> Note that this is just my personal opinion, and I am not always right >>>> :) >>>> >>>> cheers >>>> >>>> Chaals >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex >>>> chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 25 March 2013 03:00:11 UTC