[uf-discuss] Appeal for Issues: Empty spans
lists at ben-ward.co.uk
Sun Nov 16 17:39:15 PST 2008
On 9 Nov 2008, at 09:32, Isofarro wrote:
> Where a value-classed span is used and a human friendly wording is
> used as inner text, then in case 2.) the machine formatted data is
> read out, but not the human-readable version, and in case 3.) the
> machine formatted data is read out before or after the human
> friendly data.
> So the accessibility barriers that are created are:
> 1.) machine-formatted data is being read out to screen reader users
> 2.) machine-formatted data is being read out, and its human
> digestible format isn't.
> Both cases result in content that is more difficult to understand,
> but case 2 is actually worse - it replaces human readable content
> with machine readable content. Both introduce accessibility
> barriers, just one does more damage than the other.
So, I believe I'm reading this right that you're describing a value-
classed + inner text + title situation all on the same element, and
*not* where you have the value-classed element as an empty sibling of
the human form (which is what the current proposal specifies)?
> With this in mind, from an accessibility perspective, any
> microformat pattern which results in machine-formatted or human-
> unfriendly content in an area that is supposed to be human
> consumable is going to create one barrier or the other, depending on
> screen reader configuration. So the logical approach to protecting
> the accessibility of the page in these cases is not to use any
> microformat that specifies adding machine data into a human-visible
> region of the page.
Again for clarity, could you confirm whether the proposed pattern
falls into your definition of introducing machine-data into a human-
visible region of the page, given that the empty elements are ignored
in the page rendering.
e.g, in hAtom:
<span class="updated"><span class="value"
title="20081116T073000+0800"></span>16th November 2008, 7:30am</span>
More information about the microformats-discuss