Re: Does the HTML5 required attribute have the same accessibility affect as aria-required for an ARIA defined widget?

James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:
>   4. <input type="checkbox" aria-required="true">

[...]
> 
> Example #4 is invalid and not required because there *is* an html:@required
> attribute available on html:input, so the lack of this boolean attribute
> means the element is not required. The explicit ARIA attribute
> aria-required="true" is in direct conflict with this value, so the host
> language attribute should win. See HTML bug #23376.
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23376

This is true. The strong native semantics table in the HTML 5 spec effectively
prohibits example #4, if I am reading correctly.

If I understand rightly, however, one could write example #4 in an HTML 4.01
document, where @required is not supported.

Thus those who want example #4 to be allowed for backward-compatibility can
have it, as long as they're not using HTML 5. This seems entirely reasonable
to me - if you're writing in HTML 5, then you're assuming an HTML 5-conforming
user agent, which must support the required attribute on input elements. 

The rationale is to make it impossible for a conforming document to be in a
state whereby:
<input type="checkbox" aria-required="false" required>

and this is done by specifying strong native semantics and thus disallowing
the aria-required attribute in such cases.

Received on Friday, 9 May 2014 08:37:44 UTC