- From: <boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 09:53:00 -0500
- To: Aaron Leventhal <aaronlev@moonset.net>
- Cc: wai-xtech@w3.org
Hi, I was wondering how specific ("formal"?) the consistency check should be,
in terms of the similarity of the prose used in the "Description" column of the
table following Section 3.2 ("Supported States and Properties")of [1], with the
prose used in the "meaning" column of the "basic support for assistive
technologies" section of the document referenced following.
For example, in the referenced document, for "tabindex=0", the "meaning" is
stated as "put the span-based checkbox in the tab navigation cycle, and follow
click-to-focus with the mouse". In contrast, in the "Description" column of
[1], it is stated that "elements of types div, span, a.. etc., with a zero
value of tabindex are navigated next.. these elements are navigated in the
order they appear in the character stream".
The language (prose) used is different in the two references, even
though "tabindex=0" is being discussed in both cases. I think that language
(prose) may be somewhat subjective (open to different interpretations), and
that "meaning" may not be exactly the same as "description". If the
description in Section 3.2 of the ARIA States and Properties Document
is "normative" (as I'm getting by implication from the Section 3 heading being
listed as "normative"), is it possible to start from this language in the
description and derive the "meaning" for implementation from that description
directly using as much of the same language as possible and document the
derivation? Otherwise I'm concerned that the "meaning" may be a
reinterpretation of the "requirements" contained in the "description", and may
possibly affect inadvertantly those requirements.
My apologies if I'm missing something..
Thanks again for all this great work!
Best wishes
Tim Boland NIST
Quoting Aaron Leventhal <aaronlev@moonset.net>:
>
>
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/ARIA:_Accessible_Rich_Internet_Applications
>
> Feedback welcome. Would love if someone did some consistency checks with
> the ARIA role and state docs.
>
> - Aaron
>
>
Received on Saturday, 10 February 2007 14:53:20 UTC