Re: [Accessibility-ia2] Digital Publishing ARIA module

[James Teh]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 1:27 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger 
wrote:

> 1. I support fidelity between Linux and Windows platforms. So, I don't
> have a problem with IA2_ROLE_SECTION. We really have not used
> IA2_ROLE_SECTION anywhere in the Core mapping spec.
>
That's possibly because browsers currently use section as the role for HTML
divs, which are quite generic. However, I don't think this should preclude
its use for more semantic purposes.

So, we will need to investigate these roles:
>
> feed:
> ROLE_SYSTEM_GROUPING + object attribute xml-roles:feed
>
> figure:
> ROLE_SYSTEM_GROUPING + object attribute xml-roles:figure
>
> I would not change figure, as it aligns with HTML, but would you rather
> feed be an IA2_ROLE_SECTION?
>
No. I think grouping makes sense for feed. I realise this justification is
sketchy at best, but grouping doesn't seem to "fit" an arbitrary section of
text. I think of grouping as a group of some common type of thing; e.g. a
group of form controls or a group of feed items.

5. Regarding doc-pagebreak this will definitely take more discussion. So,
> you want to take the name and expose it as an object attribute? Seems
> redundant as this could be addressed with authoring practices (label or
> title is equivalent to the page number) and you could speak it accordingly.
>
I'm not suggesting that doc-pagebreak be any different as far as the dpub
ARIA module is concerned. The name would still be calculated using the same
rules. I'm just suggesting that this name also be exposed as an object
attribute on all top level objects on that page. The reason is that a user
may wish to query the page number at any given point in the document
(rather than waiting to encounter a page break). (A sighted user can just
glance down at the page number, but this is harder for a screen reader
user.) Without this attribute, we'll have to search the tree for a page
break object to get the number. So, it's just an optimisation at the
platform API level.

Jamie
___
Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
Accessibility-ia2@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2

Re: [Accessibility-ia2] Digital Publishing ARIA module

[Richard Schwerdtfeger]

Hi Jamie,
 
Here is the branch I just created with many of those changes (you can see the Change Log):
https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/issue444/dpub-aam/dpub-aam.html
 
Here is the associated issue: https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/444
 
We still have to resolve what you want to do with page numbers. I worry that this involves a potential name computation which currently does not map to a special property. I would really like to avoid that. That potentially is a lot of spec. work.
 
Cheers,
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
 
 
- Original message -From: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUSSent by: accessibility-ia2-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.orgTo: ja...@nvaccess.orgCc: cl...@alum.mit.edu, accessibility-...@lists.linux-foundation.org, asur...@mozilla.comSubject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] Digital Publishing ARIA moduleDate: Wed, Sep 28, 2016 10:27 AM 
Hi Jamie,
 
 
1. I support fidelity between Linux and Windows platforms. So, I don't have a problem with IA2_ROLE_SECTION. We really have not used IA2_ROLE_SECTION anywhere in the Core mapping spec. So, we will need to investigate these roles:
 
feed:
ROLE_SYSTEM_GROUPING + object attribute xml-roles:feed
 
figure: 
ROLE_SYSTEM_GROUPING + object attribute xml-roles:figure
 
I would not change figure, as it aligns with HTML, but would you rather feed be an IA2_ROLE_SECTION?
 
2. doc-abstract was a landmark and it is not now so, IA2_ROLE_SECTION it is. good pickup.
3. doc-pagebreak: arla-label is global so we should support name from author even if epub authoring tools don't support it.
4. Yes, this adds a lot of landmarks but the digital publishing community desires those and in their defense there is a lot more information that would benefit from these being landmarks. I know you have had this general problem with landmarks in that you can speak the heading twice. I don't believe you should be speaking both. If the heading referenced as a label then you should not be speaking it again. I agree this is a longer discussion but probably not for the ARIA 1.1 time frame.
5. Regarding doc-pagebreak this will definitely take more discussion. So, you want to take the name and expose it as an object attribute? Seems redundant as this could be addressed with authoring practices (label or title is equivalent to the page number) and you could speak it accordingly. If that is not the case (there are different uses for pagebreak)then we would need to discuss that with the digital publishing community.
http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/dpub.html#doc-pagebreak
 
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
 
 
- Original message -From: James Teh To: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUSCc: IAccessible2 mailing list , Alexander Surkov , Joanmarie Diggs Subject: Re: Digital Publishing ARIA moduleDate: Tue, Sep 27, 2016 9:29 PM 
Hi rich, Following are some concerns regarding the mapping for IA2:

doc-abstract is mapped to IA2_ROLE_LANDMARK, but it isn't specified a subclass of landmark, nor is it mapped to ROLE_LANDMARK for ATK. I think it should be mapped to IA2_ROLE_SECTION.doc-colophon, doc-credit, doc-dedication, doc-epigraph, doc-example and doc-qna are all mapped to ROLE_SYSTEM_GROUPING. While this is a bit debatable, I'd argue they should be mapped to IA2_ROLE_SECTION, just as they are mapped to ROLE_SECTION for ATK.I think doc-notice and doc-tip should be mapped to IA2_ROLE_NOTE.This might need some deeper discussion, but I think it could be useful to expose the last value of doc-pagebreak as a page-number object attribute on all block elements until the next doc-pagebreak. This would make it much easier to retrieve the page number at any point, rather than having to search for the page break. Joanie, Alex, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
I have a couple of comments regarding the module itself (not the mappings):
doc-pagebreak says "Name from: content", which precludes the name from being specified by the author. is this intentional, and if so, why? Arguably, the title attribute isn't content (though I haven't checked what the name computation stuff says about that). Even putting that aside, it seems like it might be useful to specify the number with aria-label or similar.This creates a huge number of landmarks. This might be too broad a conversation for now, but one concern I have with regions (and now this) is that we end up with a lot of duplicate information when the landmarks also contain a heading, which they often do. So, for example, with a screen reader, we might get "Chapter 1. Getting Started, Chapter 1. Getting Started heading level 1"; we get it once for the chapter landmark and then once for the heading. We can try to use heuristics to work around this, but it seems like a red flag to me, especially if authors use aria-label instead of aria-labelledby (which makes it harder to heuristically squelch