>*AT and browsers support those roles, if Firefox Nightly starts to expose IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK instead IA2_ROLE_FORM, then it >breaks all existing screen reader versions. In case of commercial screen readers this is painful for the users, since they have to buy a >new version of their screen reader.
Good point. I will switch back to IA2_ROLE_FORM for forms. We still need IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK for the other land marks.
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
----- Original message -----
From: Alexander Surkov <[email protected]>
To: James Teh <[email protected]>
Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, Brett Lewis <[email protected]>, Joanmarie Diggs <[email protected]>, IAccessible2 mailing list <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Form role mapping
Date: Wed, Sep 7, 2016 10:58 AM
* I'm not certain if changing IA2_ROLE_FORM to IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK adds any benefits for screen readers. I'd be curious to hear about them.* AT and browsers support those roles, if Firefox Nightly starts to expose IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK instead IA2_ROLE_FORM, then it breaks all existing screen reader versions. In case of commercial screen readers this is painful for the users, since they have to buy a new version of their screen reader.There's a point in discussing, the spec can be changed, if there's solid ground for that.* Both IA2 and ATK have a better role match for both role='form' and HTML form, which is ATK_ROLE_FORM and IA2_ROLE_FORM. Thus if there's no strong reason why we have to use a 'weaker' role, then I'd say we should go with the match.
My concerns are:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 7:15 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote:Hi Rich,
I've already stated my view on this:
I understand the reason for the use of the landmark role for role="form". However, I disagree with the HTML form element being mapped to the landmark role because semantics are lost. The fact that something is a form has more semantic value than just being a landmark. Still, if the spec already requires this, I guess we have little choice but to comply at this stage.
At the end of the day, I'm not sure why this is still an open question, since it seems that the spec groups have already made a decision on this:
The HTML the form element now uses the ARIA mappings for the form role. See "Use WAI-ARIA mapping” under the form element. This is for all platforms.
In other words, we can't comply with the spec unless we do as you suggest, so there is no other choice. There is no point in discussing this further.
Thanks,
JamieOn 7/09/2016 5:54 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:Jamie, Alex, Brett,We need to reach consensus on the <form> element and role="form" mapping.Can we agree on the following? :1. that the IA2 IDL supports IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK and IA2_ROLE_FORM (so that old versions of FF and other applications using the form role can still work with ATs)2. For Firefox updates here on out the <form> element and role="form" map to IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK and xml-roles="form"This way AT vendors can check if something is a landmark to determine if something is a landmark and then expose xml-roles="form"Eventually, it would be better to not have to make an exception for the Form role when all the other landmark roles are represented as IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK with xml-roles="form"This and the other discussion items of the last 2 weeks are holding up 3 working groups - ARIA, HTML, and SVG.
Rich Schwerdtfeger--
James Teh
Executive Director, NV Access Limited
Ph +61 7 3149 3306
www.nvaccess.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess
Twitter: @NVAccess
SIP: [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
