-
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
revise caption definition #1703
Conversation
This change in the definition is related to the changes in `figure` and `figcaption` in HTML AAM: w3c/html-aam#359 and introduces the idea that a `caption` may contain structured content - and in this PR - `aria-details` is referenced as a way authors should reference such content if within a `caption` Additionally, this PR extends the definition to allow `caption` to be used for purposes of naming/describing a `group` or `radiogroup`, which fills some gaps from the dropped `legend` role. If these updates are accepted, this would help pave the way to resolve #1696 as well.
A question I have is if we need the requirements about where the |
this pr updates `aria-details` to mention `figure` and `figcaption`. This update is related to HTML AAM's update to the `figure` and `figcaption` elements - w3c/html-aam#359. It is a follow on to my other PR, #1703 which updates the `caption` role and includes information about `aria-details`.
This PR requires #1703 be merged.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, and editorial looks good. Thanks Scott!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for working on this.
I agree that it seems unnecessary but it's also just a SHOULD statement; I feel like authors should not mind automated checkers questioning their decision a little. |
i wish this were the case (i truly do and personally I agree with you here), but reality has shown me that developers will argue against legitimate errors that conformance checkers flag. warnings like this, where changing the markup wouldn't really result in a more accessible experience, only fuel their arguments of whether or not a11y checks actually matter :( |
@scottaohara I wanted to merge as is since this had plenty of review. Could you propose the looser positioning requirements in a new PR? |
Thanks @pkra. have opened an issue to get a quick discussion on the pathway forward there. Can make a PR based on what people think about that. |
Thanks, Scott! |
* include mention of figure/caption this pr updates `aria-details` to mention `figure` and `figcaption`. This update is related to HTML AAM's update to the `figure` and `figcaption` elements - w3c/html-aam#359. It is a follow on to my other PR, #1703 which updates the `caption` role and includes information about `aria-details`. Co-authored-by: Sarah Higley <[email protected]>
* revise caption definition This change in the definition is related to the changes in `figure` and `figcaption` in HTML AAM: w3c/html-aam#359 and introduces the idea that a `caption` may contain structured content - and in this PR - `aria-details` is referenced as a way authors should reference such content if within a `caption` Additionally, this PR extends the definition to allow `caption` to be used for purposes of naming/describing a `group` or `radiogroup`, which fills some gaps from the dropped `legend` role. If these updates are accepted, this would help pave the way to resolve #1696 as well. * add in missing id to first example * fix spacing issues * include additional example
* update figure role This PR requires #1703 be merged. * Update index.html * revisions per sarah's review * further updates to figure def
* update figure role This PR requires #1703 be merged. * Update index.html * revisions per sarah's review * further updates to figure def
* revise caption definition This change in the definition is related to the changes in `figure` and `figcaption` in HTML AAM: w3c/html-aam#359 and introduces the idea that a `caption` may contain structured content - and in this PR - `aria-details` is referenced as a way authors should reference such content if within a `caption` Additionally, this PR extends the definition to allow `caption` to be used for purposes of naming/describing a `group` or `radiogroup`, which fills some gaps from the dropped `legend` role. If these updates are accepted, this would help pave the way to resolve #1696 as well. * add in missing id to first example * fix spacing issues * include additional example
* include mention of figure/caption this pr updates `aria-details` to mention `figure` and `figcaption`. This update is related to HTML AAM's update to the `figure` and `figcaption` elements - w3c/html-aam#359. It is a follow on to my other PR, #1703 which updates the `caption` role and includes information about `aria-details`. Co-authored-by: Sarah Higley <[email protected]>
* update figure role This PR requires #1703 be merged. * Update index.html * revisions per sarah's review * further updates to figure def
This change in the definition is related to the changes in
figure
andfigcaption
in HTML AAM: w3c/html-aam#359 and introduces the idea that acaption
may contain structured content - and in this PR -aria-details
is referenced as a way authors should reference such content if within acaption
Additionally, this PR extends the definition to allow
caption
to be used for purposes of naming/describing agroup
orradiogroup
, which fills some gaps from the droppedlegend
role.NOTE:
label
andlegend
are still listed on the wiki page for role parity. Are these still relevant or not?If these updates are accepted, this would help pave the way to resolve #1696 as well.
💥 Error: 504 Gateway Time-out 💥
PR Preview failed to build. (Last tried on Apr 28, 2022, 11:53 AM UTC).
More
PR Preview relies on a number of web services to run. There seems to be an issue with the following one:
🚨 Spec Generator - Spec Generator is the web service used to build specs that rely on ReSpec.
🔗 Related URL
If you don't have enough information above to solve the error by yourself (or to understand to which web service the error is related to, if any), please file an issue.