- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:54:07 +0100
- To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Cc: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, david.bolter@gmail.com, faulkner.steve@gmail.com, jbrewer@w3.org, George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>, laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com, mike@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis, Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:28:11 +0000: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Charles McCathieNevile > <chaals@opera.com> wrote: >> Except that in HTML that fragment is not certain to be a container (e.g. >> div, p) - if it is a heading element, you don't get what you wanted. Unless >> we make a new restriction on how HTML *should* be written. > > I think you'd just need to state that the fragment *acts as* the > description, rather than identifying the position (the start) of the > description. > > It might (?) make sense to restrict the HTML or ARIA semantics that > conformingly act as description fragments so as to exclude headings. I think we 'just' need to say what authors *MUST* do: point to an existing fragment. And then, if they point to an non-existing fragment, then - in fact - per the way browsers handle it, the entire page would be in scope, no? -- Leif H Silli
Received on Thursday, 22 March 2012 14:54:44 UTC