Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
Hi Rob, thank you, and sorry for the delayed answer. The need for xml comes from the site being a web application for an academic work. The idea is to generate xml both to the site and for exchange purposes. I could generate both xml and html but that isn't very elegant, and would not optimise the resources. In fact, accessibility, validity, design and usability are my own concerns, they aren't part of the work, won't be evaluated, and are taking more time then they should. Anyway, as long as it is possible to do, the more difficult a work, the more one learns. I gess I've lost a good part of the WAI-ARIA development history, it's kind of hard to understand the excessive and aparently arbitrary strictness of xhtml in regards to ARIA. regards, isabel On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Rob Crowther robe...@boogdesign.comwrote: What XML content do you need to include? If you just stick to regular HTML5 then all the ARIA stuff is valid (with some sanity restrictions) and you won't have to work around the strict parsing: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/**web-apps/current-work/** multipage/elements.html#wai-**ariahttp://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#wai-aria XML elements will be parsed into the HTML5 document tree, albeit slightly differently to how an XML document would be parsed, but maybe close enough for your purposes depending on what XML you'll be including. Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
Hi Isabel, It sounds like you might be confusing/mixing your requirements... from the limited information you have provided, this sounds like perfect candidate to generate two separate files ie: HTML already has accessibility built in, and you get the XML file contain exactly what you require. regards, Mathew Robertson On 1 August 2012 09:29, Isabel Santos unboun...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Rob, thank you, and sorry for the delayed answer. The need for xml comes from the site being a web application for an academic work. The idea is to generate xml both to the site and for exchange purposes. I could generate both xml and html but that isn't very elegant, and would not optimise the resources. In fact, accessibility, validity, design and usability are my own concerns, they aren't part of the work, won't be evaluated, and are taking more time then they should. Anyway, as long as it is possible to do, the more difficult a work, the more one learns. I gess I've lost a good part of the WAI-ARIA development history, it's kind of hard to understand the excessive and aparently arbitrary strictness of xhtml in regards to ARIA. regards, isabel On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Rob Crowther robe...@boogdesign.comwrote: What XML content do you need to include? If you just stick to regular HTML5 then all the ARIA stuff is valid (with some sanity restrictions) and you won't have to work around the strict parsing: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/**web-apps/current-work/** multipage/elements.html#wai-**ariahttp://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#wai-aria XML elements will be parsed into the HTML5 document tree, albeit slightly differently to how an XML document would be parsed, but maybe close enough for your purposes depending on what XML you'll be including. Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
On 01/08/12 00:29, Isabel Santos wrote: I could generate both xml and html but that isn't very elegant, and would not optimise the resources. Unless you serve the XHTML files with a MIME type of application/xml or application/xhtml+xml, which will break things in IE9, the browser will treat all the content as HTML anyway. This is precisely because of XHTML's arbitrary strictness. http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML#Differences_Between_HTML_and_XHTML Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
On 26/07/2012 23:41, Isabel Santos wrote: I decided to use polyglot markup, allthough it involved serving it as text-html for old trident browsers, to be able to include xml content on the site (wich I'm still learning). What XML content do you need to include? If you just stick to regular HTML5 then all the ARIA stuff is valid (with some sanity restrictions) and you won't have to work around the strict parsing: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#wai-aria XML elements will be parsed into the HTML5 document tree, albeit slightly differently to how an XML document would be parsed, but maybe close enough for your purposes depending on what XML you'll be including. Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
Hi Kevin, thank you for your feedback, I do recall times when this list was quite more active :) I found out I can use WAI-ARIA with html5 polyglot, without any aditional schema or doctype, I was tired the other day, and not thinking straight. The reason it wasn't validating, is because polyglot markup is considerably stricter, relying on older specifications, so it does not allow most new wai-aria roles and states from the latest realese candidate specification. I'm still testing against validation, what structures can I use, and what elements can take them (I imagine the rc specs are way ahead the validator, one cannot really follow their examples without testing) but its better then nothing. Anyway, I was hoping wai-aria could fill in the gap if javascript was unavalilable, but state change reliy heavily on javascript, so no miracles yet. It still is nice to have some control over the NVDAs announcements. It promisses to be a steep learning curve, and a longer headset time hearing strange html announcements, no doubt a challenge. thank you so much isabel On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Kevin L. Erickson kevinlerick...@gmail.com wrote: I am also looking into some similar areas. Looking for replies??? Kevin Erickson 804-873-0388 On Jul 26, 2012, at 6:41 PM, Isabel Santos unboun...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, I've been researching for a way to use aria roles and states, to enhance accessibility on a web application, but it seems to be turning my brain into a soup of glia cells and floating neurons flashing like crazy fireflies! I decided to use polyglot markup, allthough it involved serving it as text-html for old trident browsers, to be able to include xml content on the site (wich I'm still learning). Since I'm using dropdown menus, that do not open on tab focus without javascript, I decided to try on wai-aria to improve the overall accessibility of the site, complementing the semantics, with or without javascript. And all was well, I was loving the idea and the new possibilities WAI-ARIA brings to the game, untill I tested it in http://validator.nu/. According to the Polyglot Markup: HTML-Compatible XHTML Documents ( http://www.w3.org/TR/html-polyglot/) I shouldn't use any docktype on the head of the document besides the !DOCTYPE HTML declaration, and am only allowed to use the default namespaces html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; math xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML; svg xmlns=http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; wich by the way, I can and should omit, because they are included in the html5 by default. Yet XHTML is, according to http://www.alistapart.com/articles/waiaria/ the extendible markup language, so it makes sense to extended it. Also, xml is supposed to allow for publication and standardization of doctypes and schemas, to avoid the need to be always reinventing the weel, and to allow easier document sharing. Since WAI-ARIA is gaining so mutch ground in terms of implementation (I'm gessing probably more driven by the mobile market then by the screen reader user needs) their should be already a doctype or a schema learking around. I'm not sure the one on ALAs exemple is what I need, but then again, it seems to have been designed to xhtml 1.1, not to polyglot XHTML5. I can´t avoid stranging that I'm finding so few documents on the web mentioning both polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, most of them refering to older xhtml versions, stating the incompatibility, whille telling us to break the standards in favor of the accessibility (no doubt accessibility is more important, but why should one have to choose?). I'm probably missing something here, this doesn't make much sense, I'm really, really confused, too many documents, from several different groups, and I'm far from an expert. Can any of you offer some guidance on the matter? already gratefull for your time, regards isabel santos *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML5 polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, is there a valid way?
I am also looking into some similar areas. Looking for replies??? Kevin Erickson 804-873-0388 On Jul 26, 2012, at 6:41 PM, Isabel Santos unboun...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, I've been researching for a way to use aria roles and states, to enhance accessibility on a web application, but it seems to be turning my brain into a soup of glia cells and floating neurons flashing like crazy fireflies! I decided to use polyglot markup, allthough it involved serving it as text-html for old trident browsers, to be able to include xml content on the site (wich I'm still learning). Since I'm using dropdown menus, that do not open on tab focus without javascript, I decided to try on wai-aria to improve the overall accessibility of the site, complementing the semantics, with or without javascript. And all was well, I was loving the idea and the new possibilities WAI-ARIA brings to the game, untill I tested it in http://validator.nu/. According to the Polyglot Markup: HTML-Compatible XHTML Documents (http://www.w3.org/TR/html-polyglot/) I shouldn't use any docktype on the head of the document besides the !DOCTYPE HTML declaration, and am only allowed to use the default namespaces html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; math xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML; svg xmlns=http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; wich by the way, I can and should omit, because they are included in the html5 by default. Yet XHTML is, according to http://www.alistapart.com/articles/waiaria/ the extendible markup language, so it makes sense to extended it. Also, xml is supposed to allow for publication and standardization of doctypes and schemas, to avoid the need to be always reinventing the weel, and to allow easier document sharing. Since WAI-ARIA is gaining so mutch ground in terms of implementation (I'm gessing probably more driven by the mobile market then by the screen reader user needs) their should be already a doctype or a schema learking around. I'm not sure the one on ALAs exemple is what I need, but then again, it seems to have been designed to xhtml 1.1, not to polyglot XHTML5. I can´t avoid stranging that I'm finding so few documents on the web mentioning both polyglot markup and WAI-ARIA, most of them refering to older xhtml versions, stating the incompatibility, whille telling us to break the standards in favor of the accessibility (no doubt accessibility is more important, but why should one have to choose?). I'm probably missing something here, this doesn't make much sense, I'm really, really confused, too many documents, from several different groups, and I'm far from an expert. Can any of you offer some guidance on the matter? already gratefull for your time, regards isabel santos *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
