Re: [orca-list] Aria-hidden: confirmation in newer Orcas?

[Mallory van Achterberg <stommepoes stommepoes nl>]

On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 09:58:47AM -0500, Joanmarie Diggs wrote:
> Hey Janina.
>
> On 11/30/2013 08:00 PM, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > This is correct. It's FF that's broken.
>
> Any chance you could convince them of that? <smiles> I've not been able
> to. See, for example, the following message in which not only is my
> suggestion dismissed, but I'm told that I should also be checking for
> other "offscreen" objects that are exposed to Orca but should not be
> exposed to end users:
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-accessibility-devel/2013-September/msg00007.html

According to Steve Faulkner, aria-hidden should trump everything else, or
that that is the attempt. If so, would it make more sense to first only
check if there's aria-hidden, and ignore all other display-affecting states
then? That might be quicker. 

I suspect that now that there's more support for aria-hidden, that web
evangelistas are going to be using it a LOT in widgets, from dropdown
menus (as mentioned here http://terrillthompson.com/blog/474) and dialogs
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2012OctDec/0010.html).

Plus we can assume there'll be lots of unnecessary aria-anything added
to markup as time progresses :(

-M