RE: Proposal: ARIA-ROLE & CSS definition integration

> Interesting, but nothing at all to do with the SWeb project/goals. You are
still talking > about human/human communication here. The SWeb goal is to
perform work without human
> intervention or communication being necessary. Perhaps 'inference web'
would have been a > better term, but we are stuck with 'semantic web' now.

This is how I have always view "Semantic Web". A non-special needs user of a
standard Web browser doesn't need HTML to figure out when red, bold text
means "important" and when it means "this field on this form is required."
That Web browser application *does* need semantic tags to act differently on
red, bold text that should be "important" text as opposed to indicated a
required form field; so does a search engine, and so do a lot of other
"interesting" applications.

Other than the ARIA spec, which should be rolled 100% into HTML 5, I have
seen little to believe that we are honestly working toward the Semantic Web
goal. In fact, I see an awful lot that is contrary to it. All of these
RIA-related features need to be *removed* from HTML 5 unless ARIA is a
mandatory part of HTML 5 (made part of the spec, and the tags are
mandatory). To do otherwise is to violate one of our stated goals.

So, which bullet do we prefer to bite? Removing the "Web 2.0" stuff from
HTML 5? Or making ARIA a mandatory set of attributes/tags/whatever in HTML
5, and (hopefully) finding a way to make a direct connection between CSS
definitions and ARIA?


Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2008 05:11:17 UTC