- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 00:05:52 +0100
- To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On 02/09/2009 22:02, Steven Faulkner wrote: > Hi benjamin > > >/think/ it's safe to say that PFWG intend that while mainstream user > agents like Opera could provide a >shortcut key for HTML5's "nav" > element (for example), they should not provide the same shortcut key for > "div >role='navigation'". > > > "There are also mainstream benefits of providing navigation landmarks. > Your browser may assign key sequences to move focus to these sections as > they can be set on every site. Navigation to these landmarks is device > independent. A personal digital assistant (PDA) could assign a device > key to get to them in your document." > http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-practices/#kbd_layout > > This passage from the best practices guideindicates that ARIA landmarks > could be used to provide keyboard navigation in mainstream user agents. > and it would make sense in the case of the <nav> element it was mapped > to the shortcut as role="navigation", though it would not makes sense > for some other HTML5 elements to be mapped onto landmark roles. Thanks for the reference! I hadn't spotted that. That guide is intended to be informative, so it doesn't really untangle the normative provisions (or lack thereof) in the ARIA spec, but at least it shows PFWG isn't as hostile to regular user agents using at least some of the semantics encoded with ARIA as I'd thought. :) It would be helpful if there were more clarity about this in the normative provisions. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 23:06:29 UTC