You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the Tri-State Checkbox Example, aria-controls is applied to the "All condiments" checkbox, with a value referencing all four IDs of the individual condiment two-state checkboxes. This is programmatically correct, but:
as covered in What to do about aria-controls #995, there is still no consensus about how aria-controls should be surfaced by assistive technology. Indeed, the previous surfacing by JAWS (now silenced by default) didn't take multiple IDREFs into account.
Given the above, should aria-controls usage be added to the "WAI-ARIA Roles, States, and Properties" section of the Checkbox design pattern? And for the purposes of ARIA-AT testing (ref: w3c/aria-at#322), my belief is that no assertions can be included as of the time of filing, because there is no meaningful understanding of how to surface the information.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In the Tri-State Checkbox Example,
aria-controls
is applied to the "All condiments" checkbox, with a value referencing all four IDs of the individual condiment two-state checkboxes. This is programmatically correct, but:aria-controls
usage isn't mentioned anywhere within the Checkbox design pattern; andaria-controls
should be surfaced by assistive technology. Indeed, the previous surfacing by JAWS (now silenced by default) didn't take multiple IDREFs into account.Given the above, should
aria-controls
usage be added to the "WAI-ARIA Roles, States, and Properties" section of the Checkbox design pattern? And for the purposes of ARIA-AT testing (ref: w3c/aria-at#322), my belief is that no assertions can be included as of the time of filing, because there is no meaningful understanding of how to surface the information.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: