- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 15:39:15 +0200
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
James, in HTML5 bug 10919, comment 15, I suggested to make a link presentational. This in order to avoid that e.g. a blind person would be 'disturbed' by a link which only lead to a larger version of an image. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10919#c15 This lead to some debate in the subsequent comments of that bug: since links are focusable and thus, supposedly, role=presentation should be ignored. But could it still be meaningful or of benefit to describe a link as presentational? Would it effectively be like stating that the link has two roles, link role and presentation role? Several roles inside @role is supposed to be valid. Btw, what if a table cell of a presentational table is given the tabindex attribute? What would it mean to, in that case, 'expose the element with implicit native semantics'? Leif H Silli James Craig, Tue, 10 May 2011 16:37:37 -0700: > On May 10, 2011, at 4:31 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> But is the bug only that the IMG isn't presented even when it has >> explicit focus? Or is it also part of the bug that - when reading the >> following sentence as a sentence - the IMG is ignored: >> >> <p>I <img src=heart alt=love tabindex=0 role=presentation > you.</p> > > If you're asking what I think you're asking, then the answer is that > the image should be available at all times, not just when it's > focused. According to the spec language below, the user agents must > ignore the presentation role when it's focusable, not just when it's > focused. > > > If an element with a role of presentation is focusable, user agents > MUST ignore the normal effect of the role and expose the element with > implicit native semantics, in order to ensure that the element is > both understandable and operable.
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2011 13:39:48 UTC