E-mail List Archives
Re: Explicit association with <header> required/recommended for <article>?
From: Robert Fentress
Date: Feb 5, 2018 9:53AM
- Next message: Robert Fentress: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommended for ?" - Previous message: JP Jamous: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommendedfor ?" - Next message in Thread: Robert Fentress: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommended for ?" - Previous message in Thread: JP Jamous: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommendedfor ?" - View all messages in this Thread
Yeah, I guess you're right. A header could contain content other than a
heading. So does the accessible name for the article automatically get
populated with the highest heading level it contains then?
My use case is if the user wants to have navigate amongst multiple articles
on a page without diving into the contents of each. If there are multiple
nav elements on a page, you would need to label them to enable the user to
quickly jump to the one that is most relevant. In the same sense, wouldn't
you want to label articles? Actually, I don't even remember if any screen
readers provide affordances for jumping between or listing articles, per
se, but, if they did, I'd think this would be useful.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:09 AM, < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> I think you mean heading, not header.
>
> Headers are repeating elements at the top of something, such as a page
> header or table header.
>
> The Article tag's definition is that it designates a self-contained
> portion of a larger document. It is a grouping or container tag that
> encompasses, by definition, other tagged elements such as P and Hx tags.
>
> To me, the relationship is already explicit because the Hx tag is within
> the Article tag.
>
> â â â
> Bevi Chagnon, founder/CEO | <EMAIL REMOVED>
> â â â
> PubCom: Technologists for Accessible Design + Publishing
> consulting ' training ' development ' design ' sec. 508 services
> Upcoming classes at www.PubCom.com/classes
> â â â
>
>
- Next message: Robert Fentress: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommended for ?" - Previous message: JP Jamous: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommendedfor ?" - Next message in Thread: Robert Fentress: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommended for ?" - Previous message in Thread: JP Jamous: "Re: Explicit association with
required/recommendedfor ?" - View all messages in this Thread