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
Use navigation role for TOC #499
Conversation
c75469b
to
a4b92d2
Compare
a4b92d2
to
bd47382
Compare
LGTM |
This change breaks Pubrules Checker, see e.g.: The error is:
This means Echidna now refuses to publish documents authored with ReSpec. An obvious fix would be to revert this change or fix Pubrules checker, whichever is right. |
role=navigation on ul is non-conforming in HTML suggest adding role=navigation to no role on the Regards SteveF On 13 November 2015 at 10:25, Anssi Kostiainen notifications@github.com
|
This is partially my fault. I had a PR sitting there that I should have closed, and PLH merged it. I'll back that out tomorrow. Sent from my iPhone
|
I'm up - I will do it now. Actually, I will move it to the section element On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:49 AM, Marcos Caceres notifications@github.com
Shane McCarron |
I have a fix for this that should resolve he echidna issue. Note that I personally don't feel this change is necessary at all. role="directory" which we had on there before is also correct. This is a static table of contents. |
Fixes issue with echidna as pointed out in PR #499
Noticed that PR #499 changed the role to navigation. This PR changes the wrapper for TOCs to nav when using the new experimental style sheets. Added code to support both of these. However, note that when using an nav element, the role of navigation may be superfluous. Opinion @stevefaulkner ?
Agree about directory. I did some reading after I proposed the old PR and reached the same conclusion... But then never got around to closing the PR. We need a way of automatically checking changes against echidna. Sent from my iPhone
|
With 98290f1 getting a different kind of error:
|
Of course it complains. Seriously? @marcoscaceres what do you propose? Just back it out? Revert it to directory? @stevefaulkner do you have an opinion? |
Yeah, let's back it out please. We can experiment outside the main branch. Sent from my iPhone
|
Okay. On it. |
Thanks, Shane, for handling this. You are a life saver! Sent from my iPhone
|
@halindrome indeed the conformance requirements disallowed navigation on section, which seemed wonky as its default role is region and it allowed contentinfo and search, so have updated to allow all landmarks. |
No description provided.