Re: feedback requested on WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on Text alternatives in HTML 5 document

On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Smylers wrote:
> Aria is specifically about accessibility for those with disibilities.  
> A user without any disabilities using, say, Lynx or Firefox with images 
> turned off, would not be using any technology that processes aira-* 
> attributes.  As such she would not see an alternative to the missing 
> image, and would not know the purpose of the link.
> We (HTML WG) need to ensure that HTML 5 continues to cater for to users 
> with 'non-mainstream' set-ups even when ignoring all Aria-specifc 
> features.

This is quite an important point -- ARIA is intended as an accessibility 
API layer above the semantics of HTML. As such, we really need to consider 
ARIA markup to be a last resort. I don't think, even with ARIA as an 
integral part of the language, that it makes sense for us to be making 
conformance predicated on including ARIA markup. That is, I don't think 
that removing ARIA markup should ever make a page non-conforming.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 17 August 2009 16:39:38 UTC