Re: [AAPI] role=""

Sorry to reply to myself.  I feel compelled to connect more dots here.  
What generally happens is that for unknown roles (e.g. "", 
"gargleblaster"), Firefox does not expose the state readonly (assuming 
interactivity), which is a state at least one screen reader uses to 
decide whether or not to create a virtual buffer (create if readonly).


On 8/20/09 1:58 PM, David Bolter wrote:
> Hi Victor,
> Hahaha! Seriously though, I guess the main thing is whether the 
> browser should map it to something like an IA2_ROLE_UNKNOWN or not. If 
> we take the example brought to our attention by James Teh, if an 
> author were to do this:
> <body role="">
> If we mapped this to a role on the native platform side, the AT would 
> probably not create a virtual buffer, assuming that it is an 
> interactive element, which is probably not the case.
> cheers,
> David
> On 8/20/09 1:50 PM, Victor Tsaran wrote:
>> Hmmm, wouldn't that be the case anyway? What happens now?
>> We could also define a role of "" whose purpose it would be not to do
>> anything.<LOL>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [] On
>> Behalf Of Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
>> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:40 AM
>> To: David Bolter
>> Cc:
>> Subject: Re: [AAPI] role=""
>> On 20/08/2009 18:36, David Bolter wrote:
>>> If an author (strangely) includes a role="", I'm thinking we can treat
>>> it the same as if the role is not specified at all. Thoughts?
>> Makes sense to me.
>> Would be nice if the WAI-ARIA spec defined that behavior. :)
>> -- 
>> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis

Received on Thursday, 20 August 2009 18:13:51 UTC