- From: David Bolter <david.bolter@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:13:02 -0400
- To: Victor Tsaran <vtsaran@yahoo-inc.com>
- CC: wai-xtech@w3.org
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). cheers, D 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: wai-xtech-request@w3.org [mailto:wai-xtech-request@w3.org] On >> Behalf Of Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis >> Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 10:40 AM >> To: David Bolter >> Cc: wai-xtech@w3.org >> 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