-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 44
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
elementRoleMaps
includes conflicting mapping for complementary
#526
Comments
See below for some relevant references to specifications. I've been known to get muddled between these specifications but my understanding is that:
These don't appear to be quite aligned. Assuming user agents are actually conforming to the HTML-AAM specification in how they expose the There appears to be an open issue tracking this in the HTML ARIA repo already, so we can take the HTML AAM version of the truth reasonably confidently. So afaik this project is documenting the dual element role mappings somewhat correctly. There is perhaps room for improvement as it appears to be missing the constraints for the See also:
HTML ARIA
4. Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes in HTML
REF: https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/#docconformance HTML AAM
3.4.8 aside (scoped to the body or main element)
REF: https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/#el-aside-ancestorbodymain 3.4.9 aside (scoped to a sectioning content element)
|
Hi! I'm looking at tests/src/elementRoleMap-test.js, and I noticed that the entries for
elementRoleMaps
includes both:and later
These seem to conflict with each other.
Should
[{"name": "aside"}, ["complementary"]]
be removed? I think this is coming from complementaryRole.js.Tangentially, which document should I be looking at as the source of truth? I saw both https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/ and https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.2/#roles referenced, and wasn't sure which one. Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: