- 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