-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 125
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarification of distinctions between "contains" and "owned by" concerning roles of list/listitem and associationlist/associationlistitemkey/associationlistitemvalue. #2007
Comments
Crazy timing @giacomo-petri -- I think I just opened a PR that resolves your concerns, can you look at: #2010 |
I think I wrote too soon, actually, I see my PR might not totally resolve your concerns, but, we have been working on the confusing language related to required relationships between elements with certain roles. I think the requirements for associationlist and the other roles you mentioned are the same, but the language was perhaps not clear. "associationlist" does have the "required accessibility children" just like list and the other roles you mentioned, can you review the section of "required accessibility children" and the definition for "accessibility children", and let me know if your concern remains? Or let me know if I misunderstood your concern. |
Absolutely, I see the point. The clarification provided by the definition of "accessibility children" addresses my concern, and the newly proposed #2010 amendment certainly brings clarity to the matter. However, I do have a reservation regarding the statement concerning the "associationlistitemkey" role. This statement reads:
and in particular, it specifically states:
Contrastingly, for other roles such as the "listitem" role, the specification reads:
Considering the consistency introduced by your new pull request (#2010), I would suggest applying this new terminology to the "associationlistitemkey" and "associationlistitemvalue" roles as well:
This applies to associationlist and associationlistitemvalue roles as well (of course using appropriate relationship terminology). This would ensure uniformity and alignment with the evolving standards introduced by PR #2010. |
I like the suggested clarification. I expect we have a lot of opportunities to clarify things like this after #2010 lands. |
@giacomo-petri might you be willing to make a PR after #2010 lands? |
Absolutely |
tagging this as role content model - though maybe it's only tangentially related? |
I missed it because it wasn't assigned to me. Now that it is, I'll handle it! 😄 |
With this commit, the roles All other "owned by" and "contained in" relationships have been appropriately updated to the new "accessibility children" and "accessibility parent" terminology, except for the role The current specification states:
This translates to "The caption is the first accessibility child of a grid, group, radiogroup, table, or treegrid." However, the existing wording is very clear, and we might want to consider retaining it as is. |
Question:
In relation to element roles such as, though not exclusively, "list/listitem," "grid/row/gridcell," and "table/row/cell," the specifications state:
However, this rule does not hold true for the triad "associationlist/associationlistitemkey/associationlistitemvalue." Is there a specific rationale behind the acceptance of only the "contained in" relationship, rather than incorporating the "owned by" relationship (potentially using aria-owns)?
I acknowledge the intricate nature of relationships that hinge on the sequence of elements, yet this also pertains to table/grid structures.
WAI-ARIA version:
https://w3c.github.io/aria
Link to documentation:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: