15213 2011-12-15 15:55:06 +0000 Drag-and-drop processing model 2013-02-26 18:25:16 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG HTML5 spec unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED NEEDSINFO a11y P2 normal --- 1 jfoliot eoconnor annevk eoconnor everett hsivonen ian mike mjs public-html-a11y public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking rubys public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 61605 0 jfoliot 2011-12-15 15:55:06 +0000 In the section "Drag-and-drop processing model" (http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/dnd.html#drag-and-drop-processing-model) it states: "Note: img elements and a elements with an href attribute have their draggable attribute set to true by default." This list should also include any element who's role has been set (via ARIA) to either role="link" or role="img" as they are functional equivalents in the Accessibility API 61619 1 annevk 2011-12-15 18:34:48 +0000 I thought the intention of ARIA was pure mapping to the accessibility API. I.e. we would not attach behavior to it. 61621 2 everett 2011-12-15 18:57:06 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > I thought the intention of ARIA was pure mapping to the accessibility API. I.e. > we would not attach behavior to it. I can't comment on the intention of ARIA in general, or of its role in the spec. I can say that anchors and images are given the @draggable attribute by default. The ARIA link and img roles are used by developers to represent links (anchors) and images, where native markup is not sufficient. I expect that role="link" and role="img" map to <a> and <img> respectively, in the a11y API mapping. Therefore, I think that we should provide, by default, the @draggable attribute for these roles, in the same way that @draggable is applied by default to <a> and <img>. 61651 3 annevk 2011-12-16 09:46:54 +0000 At that point you violate the design of ARIA. 63251 4 ian 2012-01-28 22:05:53 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: see comment 3 63283 5 everett 2012-01-29 12:15:11 +0000 Marking as a tracker request. Title: Set @draggable by default on elements with @role="link" or @role="img" Text: See bug description. 63352 6 ian 2012-01-30 20:08:51 +0000 Please do not reopen bugs you escalate. 75312 7 rubys 2012-10-04 19:23:29 +0000 Does this feature have either a thorough test suite or a single reasonably complete implementation? 81138 8 eoconnor 2013-01-09 18:44:33 +0000 Reopening per Sam's comments in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Jan/0007.html>. 81358 9 eoconnor 2013-01-14 21:13:00 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the Editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the Tracker Issue; or you may create a Tracker Issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: No spec change. Rationale: As Anne explained in comment 1 and comment 3, this would be a layering violation. 82931 10 mjs 2013-02-11 23:35:07 +0000 (In reply to comment #7) > Does this feature have either a thorough test suite or a single reasonably > complete implementation? I don't think we have an implementation or tests yet, so I don't think this would meet the HTML5 exit criteria as-is. John, would you consider either dropping the tracker request, or writing up an extension spec? 83750 11 rubys 2013-02-26 18:25:16 +0000 Changing status to NEEDSINFO, and dropping TrackerRequest to indicate that we are waiting on a reply from John Foliot. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Feb/0230.html If the information is provided, TrackerRequest can be added back on. That being said: there's virtually no possibility for this to make HTML 5.0 without a thorough test suite or a single reasonably complete implementation, and the most expeditious path to getting this feature into HTML 5.1 would be an extension specification.