RE: @required and @disabled - strong or weak ? (was RE: Does the HTML5 required attribute have the same accessibility affect as aria-required for an ARIA defined widget?)

James Craig wrote:
>
> >  This applies not only to @required / aria-required, but also to such
> chestnuts as @checked (or for those old XHTML1 fans checked="checked")
> versus aria-checked, where the absence of the @checked attribute DOES
> NOT over-ride the aria-checked="true" author declaration.
>
> Be prepared for formal objections against this one. I'd file one myself
> if we speced it the way you've phrased it here.

James,

First, I find that response somewhat hostile - settle down, it's a bit early
to be talking about Formal Objections (says Foliot, who's filed more than
one FO himself in the past...).

What I am suggesting, what is logical and dare I seem obvious to the
uninitiated, is that undeclared boolean attribute values (where the
non-declaration of said attribute constitutes the equivalent of
value="false") should not have stronger semantics, simply due to omission,
than an explicitly declared author value. If you disagree with that larger
sentiment, then we are at an impasse - but I don't think you are saying
that.


Specifically (returning to the @checked attribute), the following scenarios,
based not on "code purity" but rather obvious logic, should stand:

	<input type="checkbox" checked aria-checked="true"> = HTML5
declared, ARIA declared, no conflict
		Redundant, but the HTML5 native semantic "wins", report that
it is checked.

	<input type="checkbox" checked aria-checked="FALSE"> = HTML5
declared, ARIA declared, with conflict
		HTML5 native semantic "wins", report that it is checked.

	<input type="checkbox" aria-checked="FALSE"> = HTML5 *implied*, ARIA
declared, no conflict
		(Redundant, but valid) - report that it is NOT checked.

	<input type="checkbox" aria-checked="true"> = HTML5 *implied*, ARIA
declared, with conflict
		When the lack of @checked implies that it is not checked,
but where the author expressly notes, via ARIA that it is checked - ARIA
Semantic "wins", report that it is checked.

(Question: what happens if the aria-checked value is changed dynamically
from false to true, but the @checked value is not dynamically inserted? Does
changing the ARIA value equal a waste of time?)


Failing to accept that these are (or should be) truisms, whether "per spec"
of not, is going to cause a serious amount of grief. It is also harmful and
counter-intuitive, and will in my opinion result in chaos and confusion
across large swaths of the developer communities.

I'm not 100% sure how to ensure that this is what the spec(s) reflect, but
if they do not today reflect this, then let's file a bug - I'll do it if
required.

JF

Received on Friday, 9 May 2014 19:51:53 UTC