This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 28969 - Would it not be better to correlate 'sectioning roots' with wai-aria 'landmark roles'? Not only woul [...]
Summary: Would it not be better to correlate 'sectioning roots' with wai-aria 'landmar...
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: WHATWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: HTML (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: Unsorted
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: contributor
URL: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#section...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-07-20 11:26 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2015-08-28 16:52 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2015-07-20 11:26:57 UTC 
Specification: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html
Multipage: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/#sectioning-root
Complete: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#sectioning-root
Referrer: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/

Comment:
Would it not be better to correlate 'sectioning roots' with wai-aria 'landmark
roles'? Not only would this benefit accessibility, but if search enigines
implement this, it would greatly enhance both accessibility and SEO practices.
Esp. given the fact that the current implementation of outlining is hardly
used by authors and search engines (if at all).

Posted from: 81.207.54.65
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/43.0.2357.134 Safari/537.36
Comment 1 Michael[tm] Smith 2015-08-28 16:49:15 UTC 
IMHO the answer here is, No, it would not be better to try to correlate 'sectioning roots' with wai-aria 'landmark roles' and I'm not aware of any other interest in trying to do that. Plus I'm not sure what it would even mean. Regardless, the spec's current choice of what elements get classified as sectioning roots it logical and consistent, and I can't actually imagine what other alternative classification could be attempted.

Suggest resolving this as either wontfix or worksforme (since it's not actually proposing a specific change)

needsinfo=annevk for confirmation/action on whether to actually resolve it