- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:37:07 +0100
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: Suzanne Taylor <suzanne.taylor@pearson.com>, "w3c-wai-pf@w3.org WAI-PFWG" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, WAI XTech <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Kelly.Ford@microsoft.com, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Derek Featherstone <feather@furtherahead.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
James Craig, Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:04:03 -0800: > Thanks for the feedback Suzanne. Whether or not “none” is the best > replacement is irrelevant. The confusion is not around images. It it > around the use of role="presentation" on other elements. I think you are dismissing the link to images too soon. I think the problem with role="presentation" *is* linked to img elements. Why? Because: role="presentation" has one effect on img elements. And another effect on other elements. This is because role=presentation has *one* effects on element that take their textual content from an *attribute* (like @alt for img and area elements), but another effect on elements that take their textual content from their - well - content. The problem is that authors are not aware of this distinction. They instead look (pun not intended) at the effect of role=presentation on img elements, and assume that the effect will be the same on 'normal' elements too, even though normal elements do not take their textual content from attributes. Therefore, if a change is due, I think it would be a better solution to leave role="presentation" for img elements (and other elements that take their textual content from attributes) as is and come up with a new value for elements that take their textual content from the child content. Two name proposals. Either: role="div". Or: role="cancel". To pick role="div" would be to learn from the role="img", which seems to work - authors understand it, and I think chances are that they would understand role="div" as well. (The one problem I can sees is that it would lead some think of role="span" … since span and div is a ”couple” - one being inline, the other being block, in CSS terms. Also, I don't know, right now: Do AT distinguish a span from a div, role wise? If yes, do we need two kind of presentation roles for normal elements?) One advantage of role="div" is that it would come quite naturally that it isn’t needed - and does not have any effect - on div elements. To pick role="cancel" (or role="cancelled"?) should also be quite easy to understand since users/authors that have ever used English language software (and who haven’t) ought to understand its meaning. If I were to explain the effect of role="presentation" on normal elements, I would have said that it cancels their native role. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 31 January 2014 03:37:37 UTC