Adrian Roselli, pH0Apr 17, 2023

1/2

A few years too late, but ARIA Authoring Practices Guide finally has (only) four support tables:
https://www.w3.org/blog/2023/04/answering-what-aria-can-i-use/

Mind, a year ago it re-branded as a copy-ready pattern library without any data on support.
#a11y #accessibility

Answering “What ARIA can I use?” | W3C Blog

Show threadAdrian Roselli, pH0Apr 17, 2023

2/2

Those four patterns are generally safe, too (button, link, alert, radiogroup).

However, the AT support tables:
• are all listed as “Unapproved Report”;
• only list desktop browsers/SRs;
• do not include Firefox.

So, IMO, worth asking for input but not calling a win.

Show threadDennisLApr 17, 2023
@aardrian It’s at least a good start. I know someone on the inside who is doing the best he can. And as you know, anything with the W3C is a long, painful, and political process.
Show threadAdrian Roselli, pH0Apr 17, 2023

@dennisl A better start would not have been to re-position APG as a pattern library (outside of W3C process AFAIK) when it had no support data at all (other than all the open issues pointing out lack of support).

So yeah, progress is good but still too late for me to give it a pass.

Show threadEric EggertApr 18, 2023
@aardrian @dennisl I like how those tables are made for people who already know, too. “Toggle buttons are supported 63% in Safari/VO macOS.” is effectively non-information for implementers. It does not answer the question of “can I use this pattern?” (And of course you might not even want to use some of the patterns over native HTML or hybrid solutions.)
Show threadJoe HumbertApr 18, 2023
@yatil @aardrian @dennisl As one of the people who has supported this group since it formed in 2018 and helped provide that test data, yes I wish it would have moved faster. Also, more data on more AT, more browsers and OSes are coming. But a small group of volunteers can only do so much
Show threadEric Eggert

@joehumbert @aardrian @dennisl WAI is putting a lot of effort into underfunded, understaffed projects, burning out volunteers in the process. That’s WAI’s choice. These patterns should be better supported or not published at all.

None of my criticism is of the people involved but of the intentionality of the work y’all do. This should not be a volunteer effort.

Apr 18, 2023 at 1:02pmWeb
Show threadJoe HumbertApr 18, 2023
@yatil @aardrian @dennisl
I agree that the patterns should need better supported. The group has actually gotten Vispero to make changes based on the test results. To my knowledge this effort was suggested by mostly volunteers and a lot of work has been paid for by sources outside the W3C. As this is my only involvement in any work related to the WAI that is as far as I can comment
Show threadEric EggertApr 18, 2023

@joehumbert @aardrian @dennisl Yes, and it is good for what it is. But Test the Web Forward (aka Web Platform Tests, wpt) exist since 2014. W3C just never considered assistive technologies as part of the web platform, so no tests. And even the ARIA specification seems to be under-tested in wpt.

Accessibility spec testing must be where mainstream spec testing happens.

http://testthewebforward.org

Test the Web Forward