Remove Passed Examples that do not meet the accessibility mapping in "ARIA state or property is permitted" (5c01ea)

[Jym77]

Remove Passed Examples that do not pass the accessibility mapping.

Closes issue(s):

• Improve example descriptions of "ARIA state or property is permitted" (5c01ea) #1179 (comment)

Need for Final Call:
This will require a 1 week Final Call (removing examples)

---

Pull Request Etiquette

When creating PR:

• Make sure you're requesting to pull a branch (right side) to the develop branch (left side).

After creating PR:

• Add yourself (and co-authors) as "Assignees" for PR.
• Add label to indicate if it's a Rule, Definition or Chore.
• Close the issue that the PR resolves (and make sure the issue is referenced in the top of this comment)
• Optionally request feedback from anyone in particular by assigning them as "Reviewers".

How to Review And Approve

• Go to the “Files changed” tab
• Here you will have the option to leave comments on different lines.
• Once the review is completed, find the “Review changes” button in the top right, select “Approve” (if you are really confident in the rule) or "Request changes" and click “Submit review”.
• Make sure to also review the proposed Final Call period. In case of disagreement, the longer period wins.

[Jym77]

Final Call ends March 2nd.

[WilcoFiers]

Can you give this PR a more descriptive title? The titles go into the changelog. It'd be good to have something more descriptive there.

[WilcoFiers]

I don't understand how these are any less of a failure than passed example 6? None of them have an accessible name, and they're all missing aria-expanded="false"

[Jym77]

Because these two examples do not "pass" the accessibility mapping to correctly using ARIA attributes. aria-controls value must be an ID reference list (https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-controls) which is defined as "A list of one or more ID references." (https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#valuetype_idref_list).

I'm seeing this as the same thing as "passed examples should not fail their SC" for rule mapping to WCAG. But maybe I'm reading too much into an accessibility mapping to something that is not as clearly separated as a WCAG criterion…

[WilcoFiers]

There is no "must" or "should" in section 7.5 that says attribute values have to be correct. But if there were, passed example 6 would also fail, because ID reference has to point to an existing element:

ID reference
Reference to the ID of another element in the same document

Concern answered.

[WilcoFiers]

There is no "must" or "should" in section 7.5 that says attribute values have to be correct. But if there were, passed example 6 would also fail, because ID reference has to point to an existing element:

ID reference
Reference to the ID of another element in the same document

[Jym77]

Looks like I read too much into these examples (#1183 (comment)). Closing this.