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 11798 - It has been brought to my attention by some browser vendors that browsers don't actually implement accessibility API annotations exactly the way the ARIA spec says to; instead, they have default mappings from HTML directly to the accessibility APIs that t
Summary: It has been brought to my attention by some browser vendors that browsers don...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 10066
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: LC1 HTML5 spec (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-01-19 08:20 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2012-01-13 09:38 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2011-01-19 08:20:07 UTC 
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete.html
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#annotations-for-assistive-technology-products-(aria)

Comment:
It has been brought to my attention by some browser vendors that browsers
don't actually implement accessibility API annotations exactly the way the
ARIA spec says to; instead, they have default mappings from HTML directly to
the accessibility APIs that they use unless an explicit role="" has been
given. So it might make sense to change this section so that it is nothing but
conformance criteria for authors, removing the UA conformance criteria
relating to ARIA and platform AAPIs from the HTML spec altogether.

Posted from: 76.102.14.57 by ian@hixie.ch
Comment 1 Anne 2011-01-19 14:11:30 UTC 
If we want interoperability here this should still be defined somewhere, no?
Comment 2 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-01-19 17:15:39 UTC 
This probably affects ISSUE-129.
Comment 3 steve faulkner 2011-01-19 17:19:31 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> This probably affects ISSUE-129.

i am sure it does, when can we expect some elaboration of your thinking?
Comment 4 Maciej Stachowiak 2011-01-19 17:22:31 UTC 
The comment in the subject is not accurate as to WebKit. We map elements and attributes to generic roles and properties (matching ARIA whenever possible) and then map those to a native API.
Comment 5 David Bolter 2011-01-19 18:09:45 UTC 
(In reply to comment #4)
> The comment in the subject is not accurate as to WebKit. We map elements and
> attributes to generic roles and properties (matching ARIA whenever possible)
> and then map those to a native API.

Firefox also has had an internal representation that predates ARIA and in some cases informed the spec. I don't tend to mention this in case it conflates things.
Comment 6 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2011-01-21 23:30:34 UTC 
(In reply to comment #3)
> i am sure it does, when can we expect some elaboration of your thinking?

I'm not sure there's anything to elaborate on beyond what comment 0 says.
Comment 7 steve faulkner 2011-01-22 08:08:30 UTC 
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > i am sure it does, when can we expect some elaboration of your thinking?
> 
> I'm not sure there's anything to elaborate on beyond what comment 0 says.

"some browser vendors that browsers
don't actually implement accessibility API annotations exactly the way the
ARIA spec says to"

how do they differ?

"This probably affects ISSUE-129"

how?

"So it might make sense to change this section so that it is nothing but
conformance criteria for authors, removing the UA conformance criteria
relating to ARIA and platform AAPIs from the HTML spec altogether."

how will this materially affect the current spec text?
Comment 8 steve faulkner 2011-01-22 08:41:08 UTC 
"So it might make sense to change this section so that it is nothing but
conformance criteria for authors, removing the UA conformance criteria
relating to ARIA and platform AAPIs from the HTML spec altogether."

does this bug indicate that we are closer to an amicable resolution in regards in regards to the "basis for addition of "Guidance for User Agents" [1] part of the change proposal? 

[1]  http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ARIAinHTML5#basis_for_addition_of_.22Guidance_for_User_Agents.22
Comment 9 Michael Cooper 2011-01-25 16:36:24 UTC 
Bug triage sub-team is marking this as a duplicate of 10066. That is the master bug for ARIA integration and ISSUE-129. Under remit of those issues, the ARIA integration sub-team is developing HTML to Platform Accessibility APIs Implementation Guide currently drafted at http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-api-map/overview.html. That is the document that addresses the concern raised by this bug.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 10066 ***
Comment 10 Michael[tm] Smith 2011-08-04 05:03:37 UTC 
mass-moved component to LC1
Comment 11 steve faulkner 2012-01-13 09:38:15 UTC 
removing accessibility keywords as bug is a dupe.