WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: 4.1.1 Parsing > nested elements

for

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mar 31, 2018 6:18PM

> Use of role=navigation on <ul> is a conformance error

Hi Steve, yes, agreed -- bad choice of example on my part. My question/statement was that when an allowed role is applied to an HTML element or one of it's children then that applied allowed role alters the allowed parent/child elements and allowed roles. Thus the use of the role can break the nesting structure role/implied role and in such cases even if ARIA is applied to only the parent or the child a 4.1.1 violation can occur. That is the nesting structure requirements for 4.1.1 should be based on the calculated role not the element's tag name.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access
<EMAIL REMOVED>
703.637.8957 office

Visit us online:
Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog

See you at CSUN in March!

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Steve Faulkner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2018 5:05 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] 4.1.1 Parsing > nested elements

Hi Jon,
Use of role=navigation on <ul> is a conformance error https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/#ul

So if you do check your code it will throw an error, for example https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fs.codepen.io%2Fstevef%2Fdebug%2FjzYgdJ



--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;

On 30 March 2018 at 03:56, Jonathan Avila < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> > "elements are nested according to their specifications"
>
> While ARIA isn't specifically called out by this SC and it's not a
> markup language I personally consider that when ARIA roles are applied
> to elements then descendant elements roles either explicit or implied should follow as
> well. For example, if you change an UL to role navigation then the you
> can't have dangling LI elements without a role like presentation or
> something else. In my example role navigation shouldn't be applied to
> UL it should be applied to a div above the UL.
>
> Is this your opinion as well?
>
> Jonathan
>
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> Level Access
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
> 703.637.8957 office
>
> Visit us online:
> Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog
>
> See you at CSUN in March!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of
> Steve Faulkner
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 7:04 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] 4.1.1 Parsing > nested elements
>
> The criterion itself is normative and states:
> "elements are nested according to their specifications"
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#ensure-compat-parses
>
> If there is a nesting error found when conformance checking the HTML
> then from a strict reading it is a failure, it does not need an
> informative technique to state that.
>
> But at the same time only a subset of nesting issues will cause
> accessibility problems, a <div> inside a <span>, for example, is not
> an issue that I consider a blocker.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w
> 3c/>
>
> On 29 March 2018 at 11:45, Fernand van Olphen <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > I agree with you that it is a PITA. But I feel that there is a
> > subtle difference between guidance and instruction.
> >
> > I have to have some ammo if I am auditing a website and in my report
> > I state that SC 4.1.1 is not met because there are incorrect nested
> elements.
> >
> > What if the developer is wcag-savvy, reads my report and slaps me
> > back in my face, saying: :
> > Incorrect nested elements? According to the Sufficient Technique
> > number 4 I do not have to nest elements correctly, because I can
> > pass the SC by a combination of H74, H93 and H94. So, to hell with
> > your incorrect nested elements!
> >
> > What am I to say to him ? (Besides: you are fired!!!)
> >
> > Fernand
> >
> > De disclaimer van toepassing op e-mail van de gemeente Den Haag
> > vindt u
> > op: http://www.denhaag.nl/disclaimer
> > > > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > >
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >