Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

On 8 April 2014 21:54, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > I still don't understand. Do you think that what Hixie is saying > (about clicking on non-interactive text in toggling the > ) is wrong? > nope. > > The behavior that Hixie describes is roughly what implementations do > today. In Blink, clickin

Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

On 7 April 2014 20:06, Ian Hickson wrote: > Should there be a particular need for an accessible name for the > control, ARIA can be used to set the name. But I must admit to not > understanding why you would need that in practice, if the page is well > written. (I find most pages that use access

Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

-- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 6 April 2014 21:08, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > On 6 April 2014 05:11, Ian Hickson wrote: > > > On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote: > >

Re: [whatwg] summary/details - proposal

-- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 6 April 2014 05:11, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > > > The itself is not interactive, so only the triangle provides > > the actionable control. &g

[whatwg] summary/details - proposal

note: bringing this to the whatwg list to elicit feedback from implementers and other interested parties that are not involved in the discussion at the W3C Currently the implementation(s) of summary/details elements do not match the spec. http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipag

Re: [whatwg] hit regions: limited set of elements for fallback content

Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote: > But still, people (with the exception of Paul Graham) stopped using > for layouts if only that were true, take a look at https://www.google.co.uk or grep the html data available from http://webdevdata.org >Also, Faulkner wanting "an example of canvas to make acces

Re: [whatwg] hit regions: limited set of elements for fallback content

hixie wrote: But there's plenty of things which make zero sense as fallback content. , for example, simply cannot be sanely implemented in canvas as implemented input type=color is a button that when activated pops up a picker dialog. So the following code (as a simple example) in Firefox 30

Re: [whatwg] responsive imgs proposition (Re: The src-N proposal)

> Message: 9 > Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:54:54 -0800 > From: Adam Barth > To: John Mellor > Cc: "Jukka K. Korpela" , Markus Ernst > , whatwg , > Markus Lanthaler > , Ryosuke Niwa > Subject: Re: [whatwg] responsive imgs proposition (Re: The > src-N proposal) > Mess

Re: [whatwg] Various threads with feedback on HTML elements

> > On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Tim Leverett wrote: > > >> > > >> 2. Making being usable multiple times in a document, so we > > >> also have a reasonable element to wrap the main content of a blog > > >> post. > > > > > >The spec does not limit to being used only once. > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, b

Re: [whatwg] Various threads with feedback on HTML elements

Hi Tim, Authors must not include more than one main element in a document. > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-main-element You are pointing to the W3C HTML spec, the WHATWG spec (the one that this mailing list deals with) has a different definition for the mai

Re: [whatwg] Should a element require a reference? (was: use cases for without ?)

ced data > with captions, or > 2) a new element be created similar to with an attribute similar > to the "for" attribute that is not required to be located within a user > interface such as form, or > 3) a new set of elements similar to and be created > to group unre

Re: [whatwg] use cases for without ?

> >> Here is such an article: >> http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2014-bmw-4-series-photos-and-info-news >> Although the webpage does not actually use figure elements, it would be >> appropriate for the photographs that are embedded in the main article. The >> phot

Re: [whatwg] use cases for without ?

Is Popular, and Where They Overlap", it's so much easier just to > give them a and refer to "Table 1" and "Table 2" in the > document. > > --Xaxio > On Jun 20, 2013 12:20 PM, "Steve Faulkner" > wrote: > >> OK so how do you refere

Re: [whatwg] use cases for without ?

t; HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >> >> >> On 20 June 2013 19:27, Xaxio Brandish wrote: >> >>> An illustration of a font name, in its respective font? >>> >>> --Xaxio >>> On Jun 20, 2013 11:24 AM, "Steve Faulkner" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> What are the use cases for a without a ? >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> SteveF >>>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >>>> >>> >>

Re: [whatwg] use cases for without ?

pective font? > > --Xaxio > On Jun 20, 2013 11:24 AM, "Steve Faulkner" > wrote: > >> What are the use cases for a without a ? >> -- >> >> Regards >> >> SteveF >> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >> >

[whatwg] use cases for without ?

What are the use cases for a without a ? -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1

Re: [whatwg] @aria-labelledby | Re: @generator-unable-to-provide-required-alt, figure with figcaption

/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 18 June 2013 12:02, Steve Faulkner wrote: > Hi Jonas > > >> I.e. is the difference between the W3C and WHATWG versions here just a >> difference in authoring requirements? Or also a difference in >> implementations requireme

Re: [whatwg] @aria-labelledby | Re: @generator-unable-to-provide-required-alt, figure with figcaption

er/> On 18 June 2013 11:57, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > >> > >> Am 07.06.2013 um 23:13 schrieb Ian Hickson: > >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > If you have a caption from the u

Re: [whatwg] @aria-labelledby | Re: @generator-unable-to-provide-required-alt, figure with figcaption

> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2013, Martin Janecke wrote: > > Am 17.06.2013 um 11:35 schrieb Steve Faulkner: > > > > > > the restriction on figure/figcaption is only in the whawtg spec not > > > the W3C HTML spec as it was not deemed a useful or practical > &g

Re: [whatwg] @aria-labelledby | Re: @generator-unable-to-provide-required-alt, figure with figcaption

> > Am 07.06.2013 um 23:13 schrieb Ian Hickson: > > >> > > > > If you have a caption from the user (as opposed to replacement text), > then > > this is a perfectly valid option. It's as valid as the case, and > > means the same thing. > > > > [...] > > the above statement is bad advice: browser

Re: [whatwg] HTML differences from HTML4 document updated

Xaxio wrote: > If you believe that documenting the (constantly evolving) differences > between HTML and its HTML5 and HTML5.1 subsets would be relevant, please do > so! It would be a great thing to be able to reference such a document. I have made a start on a document http://www.w3.org/wiki/

[whatwg] Main element - Rationale? use cases? and data?

Is there any rationale, uses cases or data available that supports the current definition of the element in the WHATWG spec? In particular the author conformance requirements and advice. I looked around but couldn't find any. Regards SteveF

Re: [whatwg] Is now an official HTML5 element?

Chaals wrote: The HTML WG is one of the working groups of W3C. The working group has a charter that describes some of how it works: for those interested there is the up to date proposed charter which is being reviewed currently: http://www.w3.org/html

Re: [whatwg] Is now an official HTML5 element?

Silvia wrote: > Even if the specs differ, in the end what matters is what browsers > implement. Partially agree, it matters what conformance checkers implement and in the case of . the major HTML conformance checker will implement the conformance rules in the W3C HTML spec. This will leave the WH

[whatwg] Is now an official HTML5 element?

Hi Ian, I cannot speak for whatwg, but from the W3C HTML spec side the main element is in the HTML 5.1 spec and has been implemented in browsers and so will be added to HTML5 spec at some point as it likely meets the CR exit criteria. as for it being a sectioning element, there is currently an op

Re: [whatwg] use of article to markup comments

> Brucel wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:56:10 -0000, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > > > > Lists are appropriate for indicating nested tree structures. The use > > of lists to markup comments is a common mark up pattern used in > > blogging software such as

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

25 January 2013 18:07, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > On 19 January 2013 01:41, Ian Hickson wrote: > > > I don't see any useful explanation of how to use aria-haspopup here. > > > > suggest you look at definition of aria-hasp

[whatwg] use of article to markup comments

use is suboptimal. I am bringing this over here as well as one of the suggestions I have [2] made may include implementation changes [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Jan/thread.html#msg109 [2] http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/comments.html -- with regards Steve

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

On 19 January 2013 01:41, Ian Hickson wrote: > I don't see any useful explanation of how to use aria-haspopup here. suggest you look at definition of aria-haspopup in the ARIA spec HTH SteveF

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

On 18 January 2013 23:55, Ian Hickson wrote: > Doesn't it differ from platform to platform? How is the author supposed to > know what it is on the user's platform? There are some platform differences for some controls. Design patterns for a range of widgets are provided in the ARIA authoring guid

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

On 17 January 2013 18:59, Ian Hickson wrote: > How does the user agent know how the user is to interact with it? menus like most controls have a defined standard interaction pattern -- with regards Steve Faulkner

Re: [whatwg] Feedback on a variety of elements

hixie wrote: > > On Sun, 10 Jun 2012, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > >> > > > >> > You don't clearly differentiate between roles, properties and > > >> > states, ther are quite a few states and properties NOT provided in > > >>

Re: [whatwg] use cases for untitled article and section elements

13, at 10:57, Steve Faulkner wrote: > >> Can anyone point me to or provide use cases for untitled article and >> section elements? > > Comments on blog posts, or forum posts. > >> as in who are the potential consumers of document outlines with untitled >> sect

Re: [whatwg] use cases for untitled article and section elements

thanks, makes more sense (i think) On 15 January 2013 14:08, Bruce Lawson wrote: > On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:44:44 -0000, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > > >> >> what is the use of the untitled articles? >> >> or of the 133 untitled articles on >> http://h

Re: [whatwg] use cases for untitled article and section elements

g-a-blog-with-html5/ what is the use case for using in this case over the use of other markup such as lists? what does it provide? regards Steve On 15 January 2013 12:59, Steve Faulkner wrote: > bruce wrote: > >>> Can anyone point me to or provide use cases for untitled article a

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt , and main element parsing behaviour

w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19591 [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-extensions/raw-file/tip/maincontent/index.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

e term here? Might it perhaps be more > accurate to state, "The body element represents the *entire* content > of the document" (or something like that). I don't really know -- just > asking. > I filed a bug about this recently: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19967 -- with regards Steve Faulkner

[whatwg] Use of article to identify the main content of a web page (was Re: A plea to Hixie to adopt )

content/index.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012Nov/0221.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternat

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

Hi Ian, Responses in line. FYI For any implementers or other interested parties the element specification [2] is currently in a call for consensus to publish as a first public working draft (over at the W3C) [3] > > On Thu, 8 Nov 2012, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > > > >

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

>> Con: Adding a element adds redundancy to the [role="main"] attribute. > I don't see why this is a con, if main is mapped to role=main in the browser it means that authors won't have to. Also adding aside/article/footer etc adds redundancy to the matching ARIA roles. Redundancy tends to be a so

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

Hi Tim, > Are you saying we should not introduce a element... > > I don't believe I ever said anything about not introducing a > element. I'm very much on the fence about it. I've been trying > to carefully > balance the pros and cons to avoid a biased judgement. Here are some of > what I've com

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

Hi *Tim*, > I was just trying to make the point that an algorithmic approach to finding > the main content of a document would still be necessary with or without the > element. The same can be said for any of the structural semantic elements, what we know is that some authors mark up headings, n

[whatwg] main spec updated with suggested changes to parser behaviour and rendering

.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012Nov/0054.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt , and main element parsing behaviour

onsistent with the rest of HTML. In the long term, having and > > parse differently just because we didn't want to change the > > behavior from 2012-era browsers will seem silly. > > Indeed. Given how relatively painless transitioning from no parser spec at > all to ha

Re: [whatwg] A plea to Hixie to adopt

t want that to be excluded, but the Scooby-Doo algorithm does that. > > If there is anyone besides from Hixie who objects to adding , it would be useful to hear it. > > -- > Simon Pieters > Opera Software -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.c

Re: [whatwg] main element parsing behaviour

don't need to put anything in the spec? regards SteveF On 7 November 2012 10:30, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > > Can anyone with the requisite knowledge provide advice on what needs to > be > > added (if any

[whatwg] main element parsing behaviour

? also any other feedback welcome. https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-extensions/raw-file/tip/maincontent/index.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided (Henri Sivonen)

itsgq_y1q+fi2s5vnmr++txv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > > I have updated the spec [1] and would appreciate any > feedback > > (including, but not limited to implementers). &

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

/usecases.responsiveimages.org ), to facilitate work on the > extension specification. Is anything like this in the works for > `main`/`content`/`maincontent`, at present? Seems like it would be a good > next step! > > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

hi Mat, The RICG published a stand-alone “use cases” document a while back ( > http://usecases.responsiveimages.org ), to facilitate work on the > extension specification. Is anything like this in the works for > `main`/`content`/`maincontent`, at present? Seems like it would be a good > next step

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

> case; what decides whether a proposal is adopted or not is whether it has > real use cases and compelling reasoning. > > In the case of , there is no problem to be solved, and there > is no use case that isn't already adequately handled by HTML. > > Naturally, anyone is welc

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

Hi Ian, Thanks for the detailed example, your reasoning is clear now and that give sme something to work with, and thanks for filing a bug! will respond on bug. regards SteveF On 18 October 2012 07:28, Ian Yang wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: >

Re: [whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

uld > we make the main content element a sectioning element, too? > > > Kind Regards, > Ian Yang > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I have updated the spec [1] and would appreciate any >> feedback >> (inc

[whatwg] maincontent element spec updated and supporting data provided

d note: The first link in each list item links to the original page the second link prefixed with "copy" is the same page with the CSS added. [4] http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/HTML5-main-content/ [5] http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#main -- with regards Steve Faulkner

Re: [whatwg] "content" element, which we need in our documents

elements >>> can make the structure of the document become more organized. After all, >>> content elements all being at the same level of and is >>> unreasonable, and sometimes looks messy, especially when there are many >>> different kinds of content elements (p,

Re: [whatwg] Validator.nu: "Attribute role not allowed on element h2 at this point."

r should raise a red flag if one's paper has such tape. However, if > one's printer has a problem that causes it to slightly rip each page as it > prints the paper, then maybe it's considered acceptable to have the tape > on the paper. > I would agree with you, except

Re: [whatwg] Conformance checking of missing alternative content > for images

gt; Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:43:29 + (UTC) > From: Ian Hickson > To: whatwg > Subject: [whatwg] Conformance checking of missing alternative content > for images > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Fri, 27 J

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

Hi Henri, you wrote: "Firefox for Android (at least on the Nightly channel) displays the content of the title attribute on XKCD comics (up to a length limit which can often be too limiting) upon tap and hold: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/screen/xkcd-firefox-for-android.png"; that's useful data, too bad

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

Hi leif, you wrote: > [I suppose 'the spec' means the W3 HTML5 spec?] no, i believe we are discussing what's in HTML living standard. regards SteveF Philip Jägenstedt Wed Aug 1 05:05:15 PDT 2012: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:03:02 +0200, Steve Faulkner wrote: > >> ti

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

if the text is longer than a certain value [1] regards SteveF [1] http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/alt-tests/screenshots.html On 1 August 2012 13:05, Philip Jägenstedt wrote: > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:03:02 +0200, Steve Faulkner < > faulkner.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > >

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

all times when due to long running browser implementation realities it is not available to some users when it should be. regards Stevef On 31 July 2012 19:57, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Steve Faulkner on Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:03:02 +0100, wrote, > in reply to Philip Jägenstedt: > &

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

way as title. Regards SteveF Sent from my iPhone On 31 Jul 2012, at 15:36, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Steve Faulkner > wrote: >>> The alt attribute does not represent advisory information. User agents must >>> not present the conte

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

Apologies. the last sentence should have read: The last point is another reason why making the title attribute on images (without alt) conforming, IS NOT good for users, is that the semantics, for all users, are ambiguous. regards Stevef On 31 July 2012 13:03, Steve Faulkner wrote: >

Re: [whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

Hi Philip, the spec currently says of the alt attribute [1]: the value of the alt attribute provides equivalent content for those who > cannot process images or who have image loading disabled (i.e. it is the > img element's fallback content). > The alt attribute does not represent advisory info

[whatwg] alt and title attribute exception

heckers [3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/notitlev2 -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techn

Re: [whatwg] Administrivia: Update on the relationship between the WHATWG HTML living standard and the W3C HTML5 specification

bedded-content-1.html#guidance-for-conformance-checkers [3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/notitlev2 [4] http://validator.w3.org/ [5] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/the-img-element.html#guidance-for-conformance-checkers On 25.7.2012 16:55, Steve Faulkner wrote: > hi Bronisla

Re: [whatwg] can a click event be handled on an unbacked hit region()?

he hit region has an unbacked region description, click events are > fired at the canvas element. In this case, the click event's 'region' > property will contain the ID of the hit region which was clicked. > > Look for the spec text beginning with "The MouseEvent

Re: [whatwg] Administrivia: Update on the relationship between the WHATWG HTML living standard and the W3C HTML5 specification

ny serious lapses in judgement. Which is why the 2 specs have diverged on author conformance requirements and advice as each group considers the other to have made lapses in judgement. -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.c

Re: [whatwg] canvas hitregion() clarification sought

resending as plain text as the first time the links made it indecipherable, On 25 July 2012 01:13, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > Upon reading the hit region section [1] of the spec again I noticed this: > > If any of the following conditions are met, throw a NotSupportedError > exce

[whatwg] can a click event be handled on an unbacked hit region()?

to mean that unbacked regions can be used as pseudo interactive controls for mouse or touch events, is that correct? [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-canvas-element.html#hit-regions -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.

[whatwg] canvas hitregion() clarification sought

input-element> element that is a button<http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/forms.html#concept-button> This reads like it will throw an error if a custom control is referenced by control() is this correct? [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work

Re: [whatwg] Media queries, viewport dimensions, srcset and picture

> > On Jul 23, 2012, at 5:38 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote: > > > Hi Mat, > > as I previously previously mentioned, I am concerned about the use of the > > alt attribute on when it would be much better to allow text > > alternatives inside the picture element. > >

Re: [whatwg] Media queries, viewport dimensions, srcset and picture

e of the proposed syntax. The source code is > available on GitHub ( https://github.com/Wilto/picturefill-proposal/ ), > and I?ve posted a demo ( http://wil.to/picturefill/ ) as well. > > Thank you for your ongoing consideration, sincerely. I look forward to > finally putting this issue to rest

Re: [whatwg] Administrivia: Update on the relationship between the WHATWG HTML living standard and the W3C HTML5 specification

can claim to be canonical description of HTML for stakeholders other than browser vendors. -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.

Re: [whatwg] "content" element, which we need in our documents

Hi Ian, ARIA fills the gap in HTML with role="main" http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#main I agree that an explicit element would be nice, but the powers that be have rejected the idea. -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciell

[whatwg] Using ARIA in HTML - intial draft

the current HTML5/HTML specification and a document that is more readable (i.e. less jargonist) It does deviate from HTML5/HTML in some of its suggestions, these deviations are based on current implementation realities. all feedback welcome -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG

Re: [whatwg] Validator.nu: "Attribute role not allowed on element h2 at this point."

Hi Ian, On 10 June 2012 10:16, Steve Faulkner wrote: > Hi Ian, > >> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Charles Pritchard wrote: >> > On 3/12/2012 5:52 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> > > On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Charles Pritchard wrote: >> > > > > >>

[whatwg] Validator.nu: "Attribute role not allowed on element h2 at this point."

cessibility annotations now conflict with the page's real semantics, and are wrong. Can you provide an example of how using a redundant role value can lead to conflicts? for example: Note: I am not advocating the unecessary addition of redundant roles, but would like to understand