16:56:51 RRSAgent has joined #aapi 16:56:51 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-irc 16:56:55 rrsagent, off 17:07:03 topic issue-466 17:07:39 https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/issues/466 17:07:56 CS: example where role doesn't map; i.e. role="main" 17:08:06 CS: example of table element with role="main" 17:08:22 CS: IE puts "main" in AriaRoles property and leave table role in AAPI 17:08:51 CS: one of the other browsers does not expose the role so it acts like role="presentation" 17:09:43 JC: Safari does not expose the table semantics 17:10:04 DB: possible that FF is similar to IE - with landmarks, treat them like bookmarks 17:10:48 DB: there aren't good mappings - probably expose as table role with object attribute for the landmark 17:11:30 JC: the only way to get consistent behavior then is tell authors not to put landmark roles on elements with other semantics 17:12:02 JC: Joseph thought he had a bug - redefined the role but browser didn't honor it 17:12:57 CS: do we need to specify this in the UAIG 17:13:15 CS: don't know what the authoring guidance currently says 17:13:38 CS: think of landmark roles as being different from widgets or other structure 17:13:51 CS: you can be both "main" and a "table" - should be allowed 17:14:09 CS: as we start talking about patterns or other mechanisms, allows a forward path 17:14:56 JC: think clear thing to do is direct authors not to use landmarks on semantic roles 17:15:14 CS: seems advisory - would like to leave a path forward for other mechanisms 17:15:26 JC: spec says there can be only one role at a time 17:15:42 -James_Craig 17:16:47 +James_Craig 17:17:10 CS: the core question is - when we say "not mapped", do we mean "ignore" or treat it as presentation? 17:18:00 zakim, Microsoft has Sharon_Newman 17:18:00 +Sharon_Newman; got it 17:18:24 CS: in HTML, usually unknown things are ignored 17:19:11 CS: what happens to the children of the table [s and s] 17:19:57 JC: James Nurthen raised this issue - he was trying to retrofit old software and could not add
elements around the table 17:20:24 JC: JN wanted the table semantics to disappear but it didn't work when he added the role of landmark 17:20:37 CS: can you use role="main presentation"? 17:20:43 JC: no, that doesn't work 17:20:58 JC: it was a layout table in JN's example 17:21:27 CS: but there could be a data table that is the main part of the page, why do you have to wrap that in an extra
? 17:21:40 JC: seems like you would want to wrap that in a
17:21:55 DB: for new development, isn't there something in HTML5 you can use? 17:22:16 JC: could use the
element but on a retrofit, he wasn't able to do that 17:22:36 CS: 1. what happens when you retrofit and how bad is that problem? 2. what is best path forward? 17:22:39 So if we decide this is correct, we should tell the authors to never use landmarks on elements with native semantics 17:23:32 DB: workaround - practice has cropped up - datatable="0" - Windows thing 17:23:38 q+ to say by your logic
should also be both main and table 17:23:56 ack me 17:23:56 jcraig_, you wanted to say by your logic
should also be both main and table 17:24:41 JC: if do
then should also do
which goes against HTML5 17:25:15 DB: think landmarks should have been an attribute (aria-landmark) 17:25:38 DB: to have the landmark override seems like regressing accessibility, FF chose to expose both and let AT decide 17:26:48 JC: given that isn't an option now, think safer to have it explicitly override the role. 17:27:10 CS: where there is no mapped we would (lose semantics?) 17:27:21 s/no mapped/no mapping 17:28:33 JC: the author has chose to explicitly override 17:30:44 JC: if even JamesN didn't understand this, how would you expect a normal author to understand that difference. 17:31:08 CS: I expect normal authors to have a different understanding than the experts. 17:31:12 DB: IE & FF are leaving this up to the AT by exposing all of the information 17:31:33 DB: that is a problem, the spec suggests that we should only be exposing one role 17:31:57 DB: want consistency in how things are overridden - if one AT uses the ARIA role and another uses the semantic role, it's inconsistent 17:32:19 CS: simplest path forward is to tell users not to do that 17:32:46 JC: what exactly are we telling authors? don't use landmark roles on elements that have native semantics 17:33:08 CS: doesn't HTML5 say something about landmark roles not overriding strong semantics? 17:34:07 Zakim, who is on the call? 17:34:07 On the phone I see David_Bolter, Andi_Snow_Weaver, [Microsoft], Cynthia_Shelly, James_Craig 17:34:10 [Microsoft] has Sharon_Newman 17:34:36 http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/content-models.html#wai-aria 17:38:03 reading the spec, there's nothing about landmark roles not overriding native semantics and nothing about tables having strong semantics that can't be overridden 17:38:30 CS: one option is to define in the UAIG how this must be done (either IE/FF model or Safari model) 17:38:40 CS: other option is to tell authors not to do this 17:39:20 JC: suggest adding to HTML5 spec and the Authoring Practices Guide 17:39:39 CS: people are making different assumptions about what "not mapped" means 17:40:11 CS: could leave it like that or put a "may" or "should" after the table "things that are not mapped may override" 17:40:43 JC: could define what "not mapped" means - think it means something different in the OS X column than in the other columns 17:41:02 CS: does it mean ignore or override? 17:41:39 JC: would be okay with a MAY requirement for not mapped 17:42:59 JC: MAY leaves the door open for the way IE and FF do it 17:43:19 CS: and we tell authors not to do it - address it in ARIA 2.0 17:44:43 CS: UAIG will allow either behavior - need a MAY statement 17:45:32 CS: UAIG - UAs MAY use the generic role or use the existing role 17:45:39 CS: need authoring guidance telling them not to 17:45:56 https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/925 17:46:00 topic ACTION-925 17:46:12 s/topic/topic:? 17:46:41 s/topic/topic:/ 17:46:44 MichaelC has joined #aapi 17:47:27 SN: in IE, throw system alert if you change the display status of the element that has role="alert" or "alertdialog" but not if change the display status of the parent 17:48:07 JC: one of hundreds of examples 17:49:05 http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-implementation/#mapping_role_table 17:49:22 UAIG says the UA should fire a system alert event but doesn't say when 17:49:46 JC: could fire it whenever focus is inside the dialog 17:50:01 JC: for alertdialog 17:50:08 JC: a little more difficult for live regions 17:50:56 DB: performance concern on the side of AT? 17:51:00 JC: both AT and rendering agent 17:51:26 DB: about mutation happening in aria-live="assertive" container 17:51:36 JC: or changes on parent of that container 17:52:18 DB: not sure of current FF behavior - would have to research what FF does and why 17:53:32 JC: if there's an easy set of hueristics we can use, that's fine - otherwise, we're going to have inconsistencies - maybe they just get reported as bugs 17:53:58 JC: ex: for alertdialog, when focus moves into the dialog, fire the event 17:54:10 JC: not sure there are easy heuristics for live regions 17:54:52 DB: need to get all the information about how IE and FF do alerts in these scenarios 17:55:49 DB: reads from ARIA spec about what happens with aria-live="assertive" 17:56:15 DB: says user should be notified immediately - should try to accommodate but can put onus on web developer 17:56:29 s/onus/most of the onus/ 17:58:43 JC: fire a system alert event "when shown" is nebulous because of the multitude of ways you can do that in a web browser 17:59:13 JC if keep it nebulous allows for inconsistencies, may be good for competitiveness but not necessarily good for the accessibility community 18:00:36 JC: authoring practice approach might be the best approach for now until we fix all the bugs or find the magic heuristics that will solve all the problems 18:01:24 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14503 18:02:17 Andi to add some of this discussion to bug 14503. David will add anything he digs up. 18:04:37 Andi to propose that this action be deferred to post-Last Call 18:04:51 -James_Craig 18:04:52 -Cynthia_Shelly 18:04:53 -David_Bolter 18:04:54 -Andi_Snow_Weaver 18:04:55 -[Microsoft] 18:04:56 WAI_PFWG(AAPI)12:00PM has ended 18:04:58 Attendees were David_Bolter, Andi_Snow_Weaver, James_Craig, Cynthia_Shelly, Sharon_Newman 18:04:59 zakim, bye 18:04:59 Zakim has left #aapi 18:05:04 rrsagent, make minutes 18:05:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-minutes.html Andi 18:05:37 rrsagent, make minutes 18:05:37 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-minutes.html Andi 18:06:09 chair: Andi_Snow-Weaver 18:06:44 Meeting: AAPI 18:07:27 s/topic issue-466/topic: issue-466/ 18:08:09 s/leave table role in AAPI/leaves table role in AAPI/ 18:08:47 s/Joseph thought he had a bug/James Nurthen thought he had a bug/ 18:09:03 s/do we need to specify this in the UAIG/do we need to specify this in the UAIG?/ 18:09:54 s/[
s and s and
s]/[
s]?/ 18:11:19 s/the author has chose to explicitly override/the author has chosen to explicitly override/ 18:12:06 s/reading the spec, there's nothing about landmark roles/SN: reading the spec, there's nothing about landmark roles/ 18:12:42 s/after the table "things that are not mapped may override"/after the table: "things that are not mapped may override"/ 18:13:54 s/:? ACTION-925/: ACTION-925/ 18:14:04 rrsagent, make minutes 18:14:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-minutes.html Andi 18:14:31 s/: ACTION-925/ACTION-925/ 18:14:34 rrsagent, make minutes 18:14:34 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-minutes.html Andi 18:15:07 s/UAIG says the UA should fire a system alert event but doesn't say when/AS: UAIG says the UA should fire a system alert event but doesn't say when/ 18:15:42 s/issue-466/ISSUE-466/ 18:16:50 s/JC if keep it nebulous allows for inconsistencies/JC: if keep it nebulous allows for inconsistencies/ 18:17:15 rrsagent, make minutes 18:17:15 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/12/06-aapi-minutes.html Andi 19:08:41 davidb, yes - I'm leaving on the 16th for the holidays 19:08:56 Andi, when are you back? 19:09:39 davidb, January 3rd 19:11:06 rrsagent, bye 19:11:06 I see no action items