E-mail List Archives
Re: aria-disabled is really required
From: Kakarla Meharoon
Date: Mar 8, 2018 10:02AM
- Next message: phil@d4k.ca: "Re: Heading Structure for Documents"
- Previous message: Wolfgang Berndorfer: "Re: Heading Structure for Documents"
- Next message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: aria-disabled is really required"
- Previous message in Thread: Steve Faulkner: "Re: Aria-disabled is required ?"
- View all messages in this Thread
if we are correctly applying the HTML disabled attribute to these elements,
*do we actually need the aria-disabled attribute as well?*
If not, the where there are cases where we are NOT applying HTML disabled
when an element is disabled, shouldn't the fix be to do that, rather than
add aria-disabled?
See for example https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38059140/when-to-
use-the-disabled-attribute-vs-the-aria-disabled-attribute-for-html-eleme which
suggests that we don't need both.
So to clarify, setting "aria-disabled" for element not supporting disabled
is enough i.e. we don't have to do anything to the tabindex as screen
readers indicate that they are disabled?
So basically the issue is mostly with elements that are styled to look
disabled.
*With best regards,*
*K.S.Meharoon*
*9700120786*
- Next message: phil@d4k.ca: "Re: Heading Structure for Documents"
- Previous message: Wolfgang Berndorfer: "Re: Heading Structure for Documents"
- Next message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: aria-disabled is really required"
- Previous message in Thread: Steve Faulkner: "Re: Aria-disabled is required ?"
- View all messages in this Thread