no-static-element-interactions message suggests adding a role, but not changing the element.

[threehams]

(sorry about the title, this is a very tough title to write)

The docs for the no-static-element-interactions rule cover two common cases of needing a static element.

The message on error:

Static HTML elements with event handlers require a role.

This typically happens in pairs with click-events-have-key-events:

Static HTML elements with event handlers require a role. (jsx-a11y/no-static-element-interactions)
Visible, non-interactive elements with click handlers must have at least one keyboard listener. (jsx-a11y/click-events-have-key-events)

However, both the docs and message are dancing around an issue: people use clickable divs because they don't know any better. Making an interactive div accessible requires a minimum of 3 extra properties, plus all the keyboard event handlers on top of click handlers (and all the keyCode listening necessary to match the role). The best fix for this rule is almost always to change the static element into an interactive element, but the message sends people down a more difficult and verbose path.

Would you be willing to accept a change to have the message reflect this? I'm struggling with grammar consistency, but something like:

A static HTML element with an event handler requires a role, or should be replaced with an interactive element.

[ljharb]

That makes sense to me. @jessebeach?

[jessebeach]

I agree with @threehams that the best solution is a semantic element. So I suggest leading with that, rather than pushing the optimal recommendation to the end of the sentence after an or clause. Something like:

The best replacement for an interactive static element is the corresponding semantic HTML element. In the case that this replacement is not possible, then an interactive static element requires a role and tabbing support as well as interaction support for mouse, keyboard and touch inputs.

[SalahAdDin]

It is even not clear for me which are the static elements.