On Tuesday 2014-02-25 09:43 -0500, david bolter wrote:
I support this W3C Recommendation.
Yep.
While I wasn't entirely happy with some of the history that led to
the current state, I agree we should support it.
(In particular, in the early days of ARIA I was told, in private
conversations, that it was intended as a temporary measure until
HTML5 was ready and had enough of the semantics needed. But I never
asked the people telling me that that that intent should be
documented publicly, and as far as I know there's no public record
of it, and it probably didn't represent any consensus at the time.
I'd probably have preferred that the semantics needed for
accessibility were part of the semantics of the language rather than
a separate add-on that can be inconsistent, but that's also not the
way the Web platform works today. I did learn something about the
value of working in public, though.)
So I'll submit a review in support of advancing to Recommendation
as-is.
-David
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 2:22 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
W3C recently published the following proposed recommendations (the
stage before W3C's final stage, Recommendation):
Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/PR-wai-aria-20140206/
WAI-ARIA 1.0 User Agent Implementation Guide
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/PR-wai-aria-implementation-20140206/
--
턞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 턂
턢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 턂
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense.
- Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
