On 8 April 2014 21:54, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
I still don't understand. Do you think that what Hixie is saying
(about clicking on non-interactive text in summary toggling the
details) is wrong?
nope.
The behavior that Hixie describes is roughly what implementations
On 7 April 2014 20:06, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Should there be a particular need for an accessible name for the details
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
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 6 April 2014 05:11, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote:
The summary itself is not interactive, so only the triangle provides
the actionable control.
The spec doesn't
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 6 April 2014 21:08, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote:
On 6 April 2014 05:11, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2014, Steve Faulkner wrote
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.
Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
But still, people (with the exception of Paul Graham) stopped using table
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
hixie wrote:
But there's plenty of things which make zero sense as fallback content.
input type=color, 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)
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 10:54:54 -0800
From: Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com
To: John Mellor joh...@google.com
Cc: Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi, Markus Ernst
derer...@gmx.ch, whatwg whatwg@lists.whatwg.org,
Markus Lanthaler
markus.lantha...@gmx.net,
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Tim Leverett wrote:
2. Making main 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 main to being used only once.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the spec says:
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 main
to take into account cow paths already trodden.
--Xaxio
References:
[1]
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/grouping-content.html#the-figure-element
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:00 AM, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi Xaxio, (and martin)
i get why
by providing more
design details than the text, are self-contained, not part of the main flow
and implicitly referenced from it. (The photos should have alt-texts
though.)
Regards
Martin
[1]: WHATWG HTML spec 4.5.11 The figure element
Am 20.06.2013 um 23:27 schrieb Steve Faulkner:
Hi Xaxio
What are the use cases for a figure without a figcaption ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
, in its respective font?
--Xaxio
On Jun 20, 2013 11:24 AM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
What are the use cases for a figure without a figcaption ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
12:10 PM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
An illustration of a font name, in its respective font?
why is figure better in this case than p (for example) ?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 20 June 2013 19:27, Xaxio Brandish
so much easier just to
give them a figcaption and refer to Table 1 and Table 2 in the
document.
--Xaxio
On Jun 20, 2013 12:20 PM, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK so how do you reference
figure
arial
/figure
for example?
--
Regards
SteveF
HTML 5.1 http://www.w3
.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/
On 18 June 2013 12:02, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com 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 requirements?
authoring
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
Is there any rationale, uses cases or data available that supports the current
definition of the main element in the WHATWG spec? In particular the author
conformance requirements and advice.
I looked around but couldn't find any.
Regards
SteveF
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:
http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter
for those interested there is the up to date proposed charter which is
being reviewed currently:
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
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 main.
the major HTML conformance checker will implement the conformance rules in
the W3C HTML spec.
This will leave the
Brucel wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:56:10 -, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com 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 wordpress. The code verbosity
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
, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013, Steve Faulkner wrote:
On 19 January 2013 01:41, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch 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
That's what I
On 17 January 2013 18:59, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch 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
On 18 January 2013 23:55, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch 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
On 19 January 2013 01:41, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch 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
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
HTML5 that may have use cases for adding to an input element, for
example aria-hapopup
-with-html5/
what is the use case for using article 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 faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
bruce wrote:
Can anyone point me to or provide use cases for untitled article
thanks, makes more sense (i think)
On 15 January 2013 14:08, Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:44:44 -, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
what is the use of the untitled articles?
or of the 133 untitled articles on
http://html5doctor.com
Jan 2013, at 10:57, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com 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
sections
will respond to any bugs or comments
in due course.
[1] https://www.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
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
.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 alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web
Hi Ian,
Responses in line.
FYI
For any implementers or other interested parties the main 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:
http://www.w3.org/html
Hi Tim,
Are you saying we should not introduce a main element...
I don't believe I ever said anything about not introducing a
mainelement. 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
Con: Adding a main 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
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
main element.
The same can be said for any of the structural semantic elements, what we
know is that some authors mark up headings,
.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
/html5-accessibility-chops-data-for-the-masses/
[3]
http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2012/04/html5-accessibility-chops-real-world-aria-landmark-use/
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Nov/0085.html
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
www.paciellogroup.com
?
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
don't need to put
anything in the spec?
regards
SteveF
On 7 November 2012 10:30, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone with the requisite knowledge provide advice on what needs to
be
added
that to be excluded, but the Scooby-Doo algorithm does that.
If there is anyone besides from Hixie who objects to adding main, it
would be useful to hear it.
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
www.paciellogroup.com
+fi2s5vnmr++txv...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
I have updated the maincontent spec [1] and would appreciate any
feedback
(including, but not limited to implementers).
bikeshedA single
`/`maincontent`, at present? Seems like it would be a good
next step!
--
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
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 i...@invigoreight.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Steve Faulkner
2012, Steve Faulkner wrote:
What is apparent from the home page data in the sample:
* use of a descriptive id to value to identify the main content area of
a
web page is common. (id=main|id=content|id=
maincontent|id=content-main|id=main-content used on 39% of the pages
in the sample
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!
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
faulkner.st...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all,
I have updated the maincontent spec [1] and would appreciate any
feedback
(including, but not limited
-content/
[5] http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#main
--
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/
Web
, but what is required to get the
feature to work.
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 HTML5 that
may have use cases for adding to an input element
, Steve Faulkner wrote:
The spec currently allows img without alt if the title attribute is
present
That's a wild over-statement of the case.
To be precise, the specification requires that the alt attribute be
present, with the exception of some very specific cases. The specific case
where
]
regards
SteveF
[1] http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/HTML5/alt-tests/screenshots.html
On 1 August 2012 13:05, Philip Jägenstedt phil...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:03:02 +0200, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
title has differing semantics to alt. In situations
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:
title has differing semantics to alt
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
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
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 faulkner.st
way
as title.
Regards
SteveF
Sent from my iPhone
On 31 Jul 2012, at 15:36, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis bhawkesle...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Steve Faulkner
faulkner.st...@gmail.com wrote:
The alt attribute does not represent advisory information. User agents must
at 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
xn--mlform-...@xn--mlform-iua.nowrote:
Steve Faulkner on Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:03:02 +0100, wrote,
in reply to Philip
-checkers
[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-techniques
'
property will contain the ID of the hit region which was clicked.
Look for the spec text beginning with The MouseEvent interface is
extended to support hit regions.
Ted
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com
://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 Bronislav
you wrote:
I was just looking at WHATWG wiki and there is nice
resending as plain text as the first time the links made it indecipherable,
On 25 July 2012 01:13, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com 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
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.com |
www.twitter.com
Marquis m...@matmarquis.com wrote:
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 picture when it would be much better to allow text
alternatives inside the picture element.
Some
--
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/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie
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.com
--
___
whatwg mailing list
whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
http://lists.whatwg.org/listinfo.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org
End of whatwg Digest, Vol 100, Issue 28
***
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
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.w3.org/html5/alt
in 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
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.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com
. this is
detailed in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11557 a bug for
which you have chosen not to fix without providing an adequate explanation.
I am unlcear why you want HTML not to ignore implementation realities?
--
with regards
Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG
Hi Ian,
On 10 June 2012 10:16, Steve Faulkner faulkner.st...@gmail.com 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:
Ignore the error, the HTML5 spec does not reflect
74 matches
Mail list logo
