Re: Managed states related to aria states (was "Re: [aapi] UAI TF Meeting Agenda Tue Feb 24 2015").

Hi, Joseph. I'm not sure I understand clearly what managable state is so
could you give me some examples of unmanagable states, is it like
orientation state? Why do you need to keep states classified this way?

Mentioned states are MSAA/ATK states, VISIBLE is MSAA state, INVISIBLE is
ATK state. You can pretend these state are neutral and provide mapping for
them somewhere in the spec I think.

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Alex, David,
>
>  Hi, Joseph. Here's update.
>>
>> 1) agenda+ ACTION-980: (Rich/David/Alex) Define mappings for managed aria
>> related states.
>> ...
>>
>> I put my thoughts at:
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg/2015Feb/0060.html
>>
>
> At the last week's UAI meeting, after reviewing the action, we decided to
> split the work between two actions.  The older ACTION-980 [1] remains
> David's.
>
> To summarize the issue:  List item 1 in section 5.5.1, "General Rules", of
> the mapping specification reads [2]:
>
> " User agents MUST compute managed states VISIBLE/INVISIBLE,
> SHOWING/OFFSCREEN, etc. This typically is done in the same way as for
> ordinary elements that do not have WAI-ARIA attributes present. The
> FOCUSABLE/FOCUSED states may be affected by aria-activedescendant. See the
> rules in Controlling focus with aria-activedescendant."
>
> What this is saying is that user agents compute various states regardless
> of the presence or absence of ARIA markup.  Still, these states are related
> to ARIA since some or all of them have aria-* equivalents.
>
> The main problem with the text is that is does not enumerate all of the
> states.  In a note in ACTION-980, David wrote (21 Oct 2014):
>
> " Note (to self): next step is to drive list of managed states. Pointers
> to existing desktop documentation. Ultimately get this documented for aria
> 1.1."
>
> Can either you or David (or both) provide the list of managed states?
>
> A second problem with the current text is that the states it does list are
> all MSAA states.  There needs to be a neutral way to express these states
> since it's is not just about a user agent managing MSAA states.  User
> agents also manage IA2, ATK, UIA, and/or AXAPI states.  I'm not sure
> exactly how to pull that off, but I'm thinking about it.  Suggestions are
> welcome.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/980
> [2] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/core-aam/core-aam.html#
> statePropertyMappingGeneralRules
>
> --
> ;;;;joseph.
>
> 'Array(16).join("wat" - 1) + " Batman!"'
>            - G. Bernhardt -
>
>