-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
aside mapping revisions #350
Conversation
closes #86 Treat an `aside` element similarly to `header`, `footer` and `section`. map `aside` to `role=complementary` if: * scoped to `main` or `body` elements * or given accessible name if scoped to sectioning content or root elements otherwise, scope to `role=generic`
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there already consensus that it's a good idea?
I don't see any problems from an implementation point of view.
After a brief internal discussion, we think it’s a reasonable proposal, with a relatively simple implementation. Assuming no objections of merit arise, of course. |
thanks @cookiecrook, @aleventhal the tldr; intent of this update is to mitigate against the guidance from ARIA / the ARIA Authoring Practices (and conformance checkers that reference APG) that indicate that a This change would allow for the |
ok @scottaohara I'm trying to implement this, and using your useful test case, and I ran into a bug in the conditional mapping of footer and header: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1303917 I'm commenting here, though, because I think there is some lack of clarity in the spec. I couldn't find a definition of "sectioning element" and "sectioning root element"... are those phrases defined in some other spec? Or are they open to interpretation? If a sectioning element means a Also is "scoped" defined somewhere? Regarding: "footer (scoped to the If neither of these things are defined anywhere, maybe this is the PR to add them? :) |
@spectranaut sectioning contnet and sectioning root are defined in HTML. But to your point, yes, I think you're right and we need to define 'scoped' here to mitigate this question and help simplify and to be honest, we could probably even simplify that definition, as truly it's not just those elements... but if say a EDIT: apologies. I realized when looking at this that it sure would have helped if I remembered to link to the HTML spec per those terms. Those links have been added in. |
adds links to sectioning content and sectioning root, as was done in `header` and `footer`
Awesome thanks for adding the links, that helps! I'm not sure what you are suggesting exactly for simpler categories, but I was just thinking something like:
I still don't know if "scoped" is the right word or where the definition for it should go, or if it is self-evident to people other than me? |
Since it's not an officially defined term as far as i can tell, i'm not opposed to changing it to another word(s) if that makes the most sense. There are other similar terms in ARIA and HTML that sorta fit this concept.... anyway, sent you an email to try and discuss further outside of back and forth issue comments. if that doesn't work for you though, happy to keep at this until we get this sorted. |
resolves #1396 Clarifies that complementary content at a 'similar level' could be a sibling to the main content, or a direct child of the main content. This better aligns with the permissiveness of HTML's `<aside>` element which has no requirements of not being allowed within a `<main>`. Related: w3c/html-aam#350
resolves #1396 Clarifies that complementary content at a 'similar level' could be a sibling to the main content, or a direct child of the main content. This better aligns with the permissiveness of HTML's `<aside>` element which has no requirements of not being allowed within a `<main>`. Related: w3c/html-aam#350
resolves #1396 Clarifies that complementary content at a 'similar level' could be a sibling to the main content, or a direct child of the main content. This better aligns with the permissiveness of HTML's `<aside>` element which has no requirements of not being allowed within a `<main>`. Related: w3c/html-aam#350
resolves #1396 Clarifies that complementary content at a 'similar level' could be a sibling to the main content, or a direct child of the main content. This better aligns with the permissiveness of HTML's `<aside>` element which has no requirements of not being allowed within a `<main>`. Related: w3c/html-aam#350
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
closes #86
Treat an
aside
element similarly toheader
,footer
andsection
.map
aside
torole=complementary
if:main
orbody
elementsotherwise, map to
role=generic
Preview | Diff
Preview | Diff