- From: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:21:56 +0800
- To: David Bolter <david.bolter@gmail.com>
- Cc: Victor Tsaran <vtsaran@yahoo-inc.com>, wai-xtech@w3.org
Btw, I didn't find any allusion in ARIA implementation guide to the rule "remove readonly state bit coming from native markup once ARIA role is used and there is no aria-readonly attribute" we follow in Firefox implementation. This rule might have sense but it sounds it's reasonable not to spread it to roles having no mapping to AT API role. Concerning initial question I think empty role should be treated as role attribute would be absent. Alex. On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 2:13 AM, David Bolter<david.bolter@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 Friday, 21 August 2009 05:34:15 UTC