On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 2:09 AM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote:

> So some comments on the ARIA charter at
> https://www.w3.org/2018/03/draft-aria-charter :
> ...
> I guess it seems OK to have only one implementation
> if there's really only going to be one implementation on that
> platform... but allowing it in general (i.e.,  seems less than ideal,

It is. However, the problem is that accessibility in general is severely
lacking in resources across browser vendors (especially Mozilla!; we're
currently working with just 2 engineers). Even where browser vendors agree
on how something *should* be done, it often takes months or years before it
gets implemented, primarily due to the aforementioned resource shortage. We
(Mozilla) still haven't implemented parts of ARIA 1.1, let alone ARIA 1.2.
The reality is that if multiple implementations were required for sign-off,
it'd probably delay the process for years.

> allowing only 75% of mappings to be implemented to count as
> success seems pretty bad.
Same issue as above regarding limited resources.  Still, this one is a
little more concerning because it raises questions about whether the
remaining 25% will *ever* be implementable.

Also, the two references to a deliverable of the SVG working group
> when the SVG working group isn't currently chartered seems
> problematic.
Ah, yes, that does seem like a problem.

dev-platform mailing list

Reply via email to