Re: <header> / <footer> & ARIA (was: Re: Proposal: <content> element)

the example for footer in the html 5 spec does not fit the definition of
contentinfo in the ARIA spec.

the footer example contains just a link and appears both at the top and
bottom of the example code.
<footer><a href="../">Back to index...</a></footer>

in no way should its use in the example be considered equivalent to the
contentinfo role, and if you think it does, then the contentinfo role
definition needs to be tightened up.
>firstly sorry to answer a question with a question, but where is the
>rationale for allowing multiple headers and footers in a page?

you didn't actually supply a rationale?

>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.

a possible rationale: dividing a page up into large  regions that contain
particular types  of content and/or functionality commonly found on web
pages, provides a mechanism for users to quickly navigate to or ignore a
chunk of the page, before navigating down into more fine grained structures.


>I have certainly seen the <footer> construct in the wild. E.g. on
 >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1293.html

i don't follow?

regards
stevef

2009/8/28 Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>

> 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/
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html