Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and HTML5 <main> element

Hi harry,

as previously mentioned a way forward is to define how the feature would
work and get interest from implementers. That's what I did with <main> and
anybody can do it with this feature


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 27 March 2013 17:32, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:

> I'm not suggesting it should be used instead of <main> / role=main, but in
> addition to.
> The advantage of <main> is you can jump directly to it; the disadvantage
> is that you can only jump to one block of content.
>
> The advantage of the Hickson proposal, is that you can jump from one block
> of (interesting) content to the next (e.g.: there may be several articles
> in the page, and not just one, i.e., blog). By jumping from headline to
> headline you could quickly 'scan' through content in the page. <main> will
> only be able to get you to the first heading. I could even, halfway through
> an article decide I don't want to read further and jump to the next one.
>
> I can see strengths in both approaches. And I can see reason for both to
> exit side by side and increase the ability of keyboard users to rapidly
> move through a page. Providing people with multiple means to get to
> content, can only make the web more accessible.
>
>
> Take care
> Harry
>
>
>
> On 27 March 2013 18:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Harry Loots wrote:****
>>
>> “Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you
>> traverse header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...”****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Sorry, I meant inefficient from a UA implementation point of view. If the
>> objective is to move focus directly to the start of the main content, it
>> seems that hooking into a specific element is a more efficient and reliable
>> way to do it than by using a process of elimination. ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> “The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump
>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with
>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have
>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip
>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks.”**
>> **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> We already have that ability (in screen readers at least). HTML5 elements
>> and/or the ARIA landmark roles they map to facilitate movement between
>> chunks of content using a single key command.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> One of the attractions of the main element is that it could facilitate a
>> single command to move focus directly to the main content area of the page.
>> Essentially like a skip link, but one that can be invoked from anywhere on
>> the page not just when focus is on a particular anchor.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> This is already possible with role=”main” of course. The advantage of
>> mapping the main role to an HTML5 element is that it becomes a native part
>> of HTML, which increases the likelyhood it’ll be used.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> So whether you move from one chunk of content to another and finally
>> arrive at the main content, or want to move directly to the main content
>> area, hooking that interaction into a specific element would seem to be the
>> most sensible way to approach it.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Léonie.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> -- ****
>>
>> Carpe diem.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *Harry Loots
>> *Sent:* 27 March 2013 16:30
>> *To:* tink@tink.co.uk
>> *Cc:* Steve Faulkner; W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main"
>> and HTML5 <main> element****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Hi Léonie****
>>
>> But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?****
>>
>> Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you traverse
>> header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...****
>>
>> The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump
>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with
>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have
>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip
>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks. **
>> **
>>
>> Take care****
>>
>> Harry****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 17:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:****
>>
>> Harry Loots wrote:****
>>
>> “Here's how the Hixon proposal may work:****
>>
>>
>>
>> tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip ->
>> (jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, allow
>> user to read/view;
>> next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view;
>> next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow user
>> to read/view; ****
>>
>> next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....”****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Léonie.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> -- ****
>>
>> Carpe diem.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> *From:* harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] *On
>> Behalf Of *Harry Loots
>> *Sent:* 27 March 2013 14:59
>> *To:* Steve Faulkner
>> *Cc:* W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF
>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main"
>> and HTML5 <main> element****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Hi again Steve****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> re:****
>>
>> ... one principle is a thought experiment, the other is implemented and
>> used already, ****
>>
>> Which of the proposals are already implemented? I thought that "<main>"
>> was a proposal for 5.1?****
>>
>>
>> I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is worthwhile to define how it would
>> work in practice and get implementers interested in making it real.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> Here's how the Hixon proposal may work:
>>
>> tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip ->
>> (jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, allow
>> user to read/view;
>> next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view;
>> next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow user
>> to read/view;
>> next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....****
>>
>> Regards****
>>
>> Harry****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 12:07, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:*
>> ***
>>
>> Hi Harry, ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> and Ian's proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use
>> role=main or <main>.****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> problem is its not a perfect fail safe I have actually looked into a
>> heuristic approach and like most heuristics it fails at times. From HTML
>> data I collected and reviewed [1] I found that exclusion was not a reliable
>> indicator. ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist****
>>
>>
>> of course, bit one principle is a thought experiment, the other is
>> implemented and used already, I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is
>> worthwhile to define how it would work in practice and get implementers
>> interested in making it real.****
>>
>>
>> [1] http://webdevdata.org/****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> with regards
>>
>> --
>> SteveF
>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 10:50, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:****
>>
>> Steve****
>>
>> you're right arguing is senseless...****
>>
>> However, it's worth considering the principle Ian promotes:****
>>
>> That the UA ignores (the way I understand what he proposes)
>> <header><nav><footer><aside><etc> and lands on <main>, e.g., (my
>> understanding/interpretation) by using a built-in short-cut key exposed to
>> all users.****
>>
>> There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist, and Ian's
>> proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use role=main or
>> <main>.****
>>
>> Kind regards****
>>
>> Harry****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 11:14, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:*
>> ***
>>
>> Hi all, this discussion appears to be going nowhere
>>
>> We have landmark semantics that are interoperably supported across
>> browsers and AT, we have evidence to suggest that users find them useful.
>> We have mapping of  landmarks built in to HTML structural elements (in
>> various stages of implementation)
>> We have evidence to suggest that authors understand how to implement
>> landmarks.
>>
>>
>> Then we have a thought experiment from hixie that says hey you don't need
>> those landmarks especially role=main. This idea has been brought up over
>> and over by Hixie (note it was rejected on his home turf at the WHATWG) and
>> never gained any traction, browser implementers rejected it in favour of
>> adding the <main> element ( a number of whom have already implemented it).
>>
>> So we now have a method that works (is supported out of the box by AT)
>> and work is also happening to build upon it to provide a simple browser
>> built in skip to content feature that any user can make use of, so in time
>> the necessity of providing a skip link will diminish.
>>
>> It would therefore seem more productive to be debating other topics.****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> with regards
>>
>> --
>> SteveF
>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> On 27 March 2013 08:50, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:****
>>
>> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> "In the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The
>> user indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting
>> content and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the
>> same kind of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a
>> specific landmark role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting
>> content and jumps straight to the content the user wants (the same content
>> as would be marked with <main> or role=main)."****
>>
>> >From the user's point of view I think this is right. The phrases
>> "interesting" and "uninteresting" are too subjective to be helpful, but
>> essentially a single command that moves focus to the start of the main
>> content area of the page is the goal.
>>
>> >From an implementation point of view I think this is inefficient. It's
>> more reliable and less process intensive to move from A to Z, than it is to
>> move from A, to B, to C, to D and so on until all that remains by a process
>> of elimination is Z.
>>
>> So if the goal is to have a single mechanism for moving directly to a
>> given point on the page, what's the hook the UA uses to make that possible?
>>
>>
>> Léonie.
>> --
>> Carpe diem.****
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch]
>> Sent: 27 March 2013 02:11
>> To: JF
>> Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and
>> HTML5 <main> element****
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, JF wrote:
>> >
>> > A man arrives at the San Jose airport in Silicon Valley.
>> >
>> > "I want to go to the campus" he tells the cab driver.
>> >
>> > "The Stanford campus?", asks the cabbie.
>> >
>> > [...]
>>
>> Could you explain to me how this analogy corresponds to the discussion?
>> In the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The user
>> indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting
>> content and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the
>> same kind of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a
>> specific landmark role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting
>> content and jumps straight to the content the user wants (the same content
>> as would be marked with <main> or role=main).
>>
>> The user experience is _exactly_ the same as the experience possible with
>> explicit landmark roles. The only difference is how it is marked up.
>>
>> --
>> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
>> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
>> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>>
>> ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>>  ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>
>