- From: Ian Sharpe <themanxsharpy@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:42:02 -0000
- To: "'Steve Faulkner'" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Ian Yang'" <ian@invigoreight.com>, "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Message-ID: <618970C64BFD4B0C9D270A2724BA157B@sharpyPC>
While I do understand the argument for believing the role="main" or <main> element to be redundant I personally do not agree with this argument. In particular I would be interested to know the justification for the following statement: "For "main" specifically, nothing is needed, since what users want is not to jump to a specific place in the document but to jump _past_ uninteresting content in the document." I use a screen reader myself and while I do want to be able to skip over uninteresting content, I would also like to be able to go directly to what the author of a site has designated as the main content and suspect I'm not the only one with this view. Even if a page is marked up semantically well using the new HTML5 structural elements or ARIA landmarks, I still might have to hit my screen readers landmark hotkey several times before I reach the "interesting" content which is just tedious and time consuming, particularly when visiting an unfamiliar site. I do appreciate that in theory it should be possible to determine the main content by simply removing the "uninteresting" content, but as was suggested by another member, I feel that this approach is more likely to lead to problems than simply providing authors with the ability to explicitly designate the main content. Obviously whether web authors do this or not or do so in a sensible way is another matter, but in theory I believe it is better to be able to indicate main content explicitly than not providing a mechanism for enabling them to do so at all. Cheers Ian _____ From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] Sent: 26 March 2013 07:25 To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Cc: Ian Yang; Ian Hickson Subject: Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and HTML5 <main> element Does Hixie's response make it any clearer to anyone why role=main or the <main> element is redundant? If so please explain. with regards -- SteveF HTML <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> 5.1 <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html> On 26 March 2013 05:16, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Ian Yang wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > > > Mark it as such. For example, sidebars using <aside>, navigation > > blocks using <nav>, footers using <footer>, etc. > > I'm sorry, but I don't get it. > > Assume there is a user who is not interested in the <header>, <nav> and > <aside>. How could these markups help the user jump past themselves? The same way a landmark role would, or the way <h1>s would. The user agent or accessibility tool would provide a user interface to enable the user to navigate the document accordingly. For example, it's common for user agents to allow the user to jump to specific headings by pressing a key combination, or to skip to the next paragraph (skipping past any content in the current paragraph) by pressing a key combination. The same is possible for landmark roles or for skipping past uninteresting sections. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2013 09:42:33 UTC