- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 12:06:22 +0200
- To: "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Bruce Lawson" <brucel@opera.com>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:55:40 +0200, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > hi ann, It's Anne. > firstly sorry to answer a question with a question, but where is the > rationale for allowing multiple headers and footers in a page? From looking at HTML5 I find this for <header>: "The header element can also be used to wrap a section's table of contents, a search form, or any relevant logos." <footer> includes an example containing multiple <footer> elements. > I have seen the data, from google etc, but there appears to be no data on > authors using header and footer constructs in the way described in the > spec. I have certainly seen the <footer> construct in the wild. E.g. on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1293.html Not sure where the <header> pattern can be found. > landmarks are navigational regions http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#region > > banner is defined here http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#banner > contentinfo is defined here http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#contentinfo > > there is more detail here about structuring web pages using landmarks : > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout But these are definitions right, not why it was done this way? > I am not saying that header/footer as specced should not be supported by > AT but if they appear multiple times in a document they should not be > considered landmarks and should be supported in a different way to > landmarks. I'm just trying to understand the rationale for why ARIA put the restrictions the way it did, so that we can put them on the equivalent HTML5 elements as well. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 10:07:07 UTC