-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
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
Editorial changes to structure/prose #306
Conversation
Renamed from "Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes with HTML attributes" to "Requirements for use of ARIA attributes in place of equivalent HTML attributes" ... as this actually makes it more understandable immediately why this table is different from the preceding one. Making it an actual `<section>` makes it appear in the left-hand TOC and gives it a number (3.1)
this was the only place in the whole spec that used "n/a" ... looked ugly/straggly
to avoid the odd-looking clash of "HTML MUST", moved "documents" in this sentence
Only an editorial change that, hopefully, makes it a bit more understandable/readable
The use of the term "Document conformance" is important in this context as it describes what the rules are tested against
|
sure, but it's a subsection of "Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes in HTML", so it's clear it's about document conformance, I'd say (otherwise the heading becomes a bit unwieldy) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks for taking a look through this all. @stevefaulkner we can give this a merge once you're good to go.
Made one last minute additional tweak to the abstract ... it always read a bit funny, this may be cleaner/clearer. @scottaohara |
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
unsure what's going on here @patrickhlauke. Pulled this down and respec is throwing no errors or warnings, locally. travis is returning this error:
|
Is it perhaps somehow checking the test cases where we do expect actual failures? |
it shouldn't be. |
these are the specific errors Travis is reporting/blocking on
https://travis-ci.com/github/w3c/html-aria/builds/223597886 As I don't think that's anywhere in the actual spec's |
ah, correction ... the errors here come from things that ReSpect injects into the page (though why only all of a sudden, now?) e.g.
and
|
We literally just shipped an update today 🥳 what did we break? |
Ah! Ok, I see. Will fix first thing tomorrow. |
Some of those strike me as odd... like "Bad value “dialog” for attribute “role” on element “aside”"? Why is that not valid? Do the other strike anyone as odd? (Apart from the role=link on an anchor) |
the web |
Best part of "HTML in ARIA" is that y'all get to tell me how to fix those 🤣😂🤣😂🤣 |
allowed the `checked` attribute in HTML. | ||
</p> | ||
<p> | ||
Authors SHOULD NOT use the `aria-checked` attribute on any element where the <a data-cite="html/form-control-infrastructure.html#concept-fe-checked">checkedness</a> of the element can be in opposition to the current value of the <a data-cite="wai-aria-1.1#aria-checked">`aria-checked` attribute</a>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should get the HTML folks to export something properly for "checkedness".
Something weird going on with those "clarification of states versus properties". I've not investigated yet. Will check tomorrow once I'm at computer again. At least the other errors are fixed. |
FYI, "clarification of states versus properties", see w3c/aria#1468 ... @jnurthen is going to send a PR to this spec soon. |
This should be resolved. Is it still an issue? |
Oh! just spotted the other PR @jnurthen. Thanks for sending that!... checking why CI is failing now. |
@marcoscaceres are we ok to merge this in the knowledge that the travis fail is related to respec rather than the spec itself? or should we hold off merging? |
The ReSpec issues should be fixed now, but I can't seem to get Travis to retrigger the build. Can someone head over there and click the restart build button? Then it should all turn green and should be good to merge. |
(as restarting build doesn't seem to work)
@marcoscaceres still erroring out on the following
also, for some reason Travis can't be retriggered manually ... "Oh no! An error occurred. The build could not be restarted." |
Looking into those! Will report back soon.
Yeah, getting the same error. Not sure what's going on there :( Going to transition us to use GitHub Actions, which makes things easier. |
I think once we rebase on #310 , it should hopefully be happy again. |
chore: fixup data-cite usage
Renamed from "Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes with HTML attributes" to "Requirements for use of ARIA attributes in place of equivalent HTML attributes" ... as this actually makes it more understandable immediately why this table is different from the preceding one. Making it an actual `<section>` makes it appear in the left-hand TOC and gives it a number (3.1)
this was the only place in the whole spec that used "n/a" ... looked ugly/straggly
to avoid the odd-looking clash of "HTML MUST", moved "documents" in this sentence
Only an editorial change that, hopefully, makes it a bit more understandable/readable
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
(as restarting build doesn't seem to work)
… into patrickhlauke-tweaks
yes, that seems to have done it |
Related to #297
<section>
(so it appears in the TOC and gets numbered)Preview | Diff