Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value #441

annethyme · 2019-03-14T11:38:52Z

Rule limited to only looking at required states and properties that are included in the accessibility tree and does not have a fallback value.

My suggestion is that we keep this rule very strict and limited , since we want to map it to a WCAG success criterion - and then (in time) create another rule that does not mention any WCAG success criteria, but has WAI-ARIA 1.1 as it's requirement, and then let that rule check if everything has a valid value.

Closes issue:

Is it possible to limit the applicability of "ARIA state or property has valid value" (6a7281)? #376 (Is it possible to limit the applicability of "ARIA state or property has valid value"?)
Update Rule: ARIA state or property has valid value #365 (Update Rule: ARIA state or property has valid value)

How to Review And Approve

Go to the “Files changed” tab
Here you will have the option to leave comments on different lines.
Once the review is completed, find the “Review changes” button in the top right, select “Approve” (if you are really confident in the rule) or "Request changes" and click “Submit review”.

…-4-1-2-widget-state-has-valid-value.md

audreymaniez · 2019-03-26T05:45:46Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

- This rule assumes that elements that are not [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) or are [focusable](#focusable) can still impact users. Therefore the applicability of this rule is not limited to [WAI-ARIA 1.1 states and properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) on elements that are included in the accessibility tree or are focusable.
-**Note:**  For example, anything referenced through `aria-labelledby` does not have to be [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) in order for it to become part of the [accessible name](#accessible-name).
- The ARIA `state` or `property` is being used to comply to WCAG.
+- This rule assumes that elements that are not [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) or are [focusable](#focusable) can still impact users if they are used for the [accessible name computation](https://www.w3.org/TR/accname-1.1/#mapping_additional_nd_te). Therefore the applicability of this rule also includes `aria-*` attributes that participate in the accessible name computation as well as [WAI-ARIA properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) that are specified on elements that are included in the accessibility tree or are focusable.


I understand why there's a note on elements that are not included in the accessibility tree, but I don't understand why you point "or are focusable" ?

Whole assumption removed now, since scope of rule has been changed once again.

ShadowBB

Only passed example 11 and failed example 10 are relevant now.

The applicability only refers to "aria-controls" and no other property. Why not simply limit the applicability to "aria-controls" and mention aria-controls in the name of the rule?

ShadowBB · 2019-03-26T16:30:59Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md


 Each test target has a valid value according to its [WAI-ARIA 1.1 value type](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#propcharacteristic_value).

-For value types `ID Reference` and `ID Reference List` for [WAI-ARIA required properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#requiredState) at least one of the elements with the given ids exists in the same [document tree](https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/#document-trees) or [shadow tree](https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/#shadow-trees) as the element that specifies the target attribute. 
+For value types `ID Reference` and `ID Reference List` at least one of the elements with the given ids exists in the same [document tree](https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/#document-trees) or [shadow tree](https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/#shadow-trees) as the element that specifies the target attribute. 

 For value type `URI` the value matches the [generic URI syntax](https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt).


This is irrelevant now and can be removed.

ShadowBB · 2019-03-26T16:31:19Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md


 For value type `URI` the value matches the [generic URI syntax](https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt).

-**Note:** Only for [WAI-ARIA required properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#requiredState) with value types `ID Reference` and `ID Reference List` is there a requirement that the elements with the given ids actually exists. For non-required properties, this is not a requirement.
-
 **Note:** 
 For value type `URI`, this rule does not require that the destination URI exists. 


This is irrelevant now and can be removed.

ShadowBB · 2019-03-26T16:31:41Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

- This rule assumes that elements that are not [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) or are [focusable](#focusable) can still impact users. Therefore the applicability of this rule is not limited to [WAI-ARIA 1.1 states and properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) on elements that are included in the accessibility tree or are focusable.
-**Note:**  For example, anything referenced through `aria-labelledby` does not have to be [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) in order for it to become part of the [accessible name](#accessible-name).
- The ARIA `state` or `property` is being used to comply to WCAG.
+- This rule assumes that elements that are not [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) or are [focusable](#focusable) can still impact users if they are used for the [accessible name computation](https://www.w3.org/TR/accname-1.1/#mapping_additional_nd_te). Therefore the applicability of this rule also includes `aria-*` attributes that participate in the accessible name computation as well as [WAI-ARIA properties](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) that are specified on elements that are included in the accessibility tree or are focusable.


This is irrelevant now and can be removed.

ShadowBB · 2019-03-26T16:32:54Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

-Any [non-empty](#non-empty) [WAI-ARIA 1.1 state or property](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) that is specified on an HTML or SVG element.
+Any [WAI-ARIA required state or property](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#requiredState) that 
+- is specified on an HTML or SVG element 
+- is one of the `aria-*` attributes included in the [accessible name computation](https://www.w3.org/TR/accname-1.1/#mapping_additional_nd_te), or is specified on an element that is [included in the accessibility tree](#included-in-the-accessibility-tree) or is [focusable](#focusable),


Accessible name computation can be removed.

ShadowBB · 2019-03-26T16:38:01Z

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

@@ -21,26 +21,27 @@ authors:

 ### Applicability

-Any [non-empty](#non-empty) [WAI-ARIA 1.1 state or property](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#state_prop_def) that is specified on an HTML or SVG element.
+Any [WAI-ARIA required state or property](https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#requiredState) that 


The applicability now only refers to aria-controls and no other property. We could just state that in the applicability and the name of the rule.

@ShadowBB , we discussed internally if that was the way forward for this rule.
While it's the only required property in WAI-ARIA 1.1, there could potentially also be roles and requirements specified in other standards, e.g. EPUB.
Having "broader" scoped rule could actually catch something in other standards, that maps to a completely different success criterion, I guess.
So I guess I am for your suggestions of limiting the rule to explicitly aria-controls, and then we can be completely sure what we are testing...

aria-controls is required for the roles scrollbar and combobox. I have now limited the rule to only look for aria-required on role scrollbar, since combobox is a story of its own, see w3c/aria#716.

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

Changed the whole name of the rule...

…value.md to SC-1-3-1-aria-controls-for-scrollbar-has-valid-value.md

annethyme · 2019-03-27T09:16:07Z

For naming of the rule I am not sure whether to go with:

aria-controls for scrollbar has valid value
aria-controls for scrollbar references existing element

I think the latter is more precise, but also a bit longer.
In the first one it is a bit unclear whether we are just looking for the right format or also the existence of the elements.

ShadowBB · 2019-03-27T13:32:23Z

For naming of the rule I am not sure whether to go with:
* aria-controls for scrollbar has valid value

* aria-controls for scrollbar references existing element
I think the latter is more precise, but also a bit longer.
In the first one it is a bit unclear whether we are just looking for the right format or also the existence of the elements.

I would go with the second name as it is more precise and only slightly longer.

ShadowBB

Although it is a really limited rule now, the rule itself is correct as far as I can see. Approved.

audreymaniez · 2019-03-28T06:17:13Z

I don't really understand how you get from all the properties to only one. But if I understand the general idea, you want to focus on required properties only, and the role scrollbar seems to have other required ARIA properties. Does that mean that it will be one rule per required property (and per role) ?

annethyme · 2019-03-28T07:37:00Z

@audreymaniez, great question!
The thing is, that for most required states and properties, a fallback value is specified for that state/property for that role in the table section "Implicit Value for Role:"
For scrollbar the only required state/property that does not have an implicit value defined is aria-controls.
And through the entire WAI-ARIA 1.1 spec, aria-controls for scrollbar is the only required state/property that does not have an implicit value defined. And then there is the combobox, but here it has to be on a descendent of a specific type, and only when the thing is expanded.

…e.md to SC-1-3-1-aria-controls-for-scrollbar-references-existing-element.md

WilcoFiers

Hey Anne.
I haven't had a chance to review the rule yet, but I definitely don't agree with deleting another rule as part of this PR. Can you undo that change? We can discuss whether or not that rule needs to be deprecated or changed, but we can't simply delete it.

annethyme · 2019-03-29T08:41:34Z

@WilcoFiers, I think it's because I opened the rule, started working on it, and then renamed the file somewhere down the line.
I guess I'll just have to add the original rule file again to make it un-deleted...

annethyme · 2019-03-29T08:45:07Z

@WilcoFiers, and it's back again...

annethyme · 2019-03-29T09:03:25Z

By the way, I don't personally like this rule very much.
There is a lot of code to check for one specific edge case, just because we really want to connect a WAI-ARIA validation issue back to a WCAG success criterion.

This non-WCAG rule checks for all cases of invalid state/property values, but we list any WCAG success criteria as an accessibility requirement, because it could be many different success criteria, or non at all, that are impacted depending on the state/property, and the semantic role of the element that it is specified on: #464

But is this even a problem?

WilcoFiers · 2019-03-29T09:46:16Z

Anne wrote:
By the way, I don't personally like this rule very much.

xD Then why are you writing it? I agree, this seems far too much of an edge case to worry about. As an implementor, I would certainly have my doubts about taking on the overhead for a rule that has such a narrow scope.

@annethyme seriously, write the rules you feel good about writing.

Rule un-deleted as requested.

annethyme · 2019-04-29T14:23:01Z

FYI, @WilcoFiers: I am going to close this PR down for now to unclutter, until we have a solution for #365.

Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value

b180e95

annethyme self-assigned this Mar 14, 2019

annethyme added Rule Update Use this label for an existing rule that is being updated Rule Use this label for a new rule that does not exist already March 31 deadline labels Mar 14, 2019

Anne Thyme added 6 commits March 18, 2019 12:44

Create SC-4-1-2-ARIA-widget-state-has-valid-value.md

0d4f5e2

Update and rename SC-4-1-2-ARIA-widget-state-has-valid-value.md to SC…

2ab60f1

…-4-1-2-widget-state-has-valid-value.md

Update SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

52ba4aa

Update SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

dddcea7

Update SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

b6bf083

Delete SC-4-1-2-widget-state-has-valid-value.md

fb68242

annethyme requested review from audreymaniez, kasperisager, ShadowBB and carlosapaduarte March 22, 2019 16:39

annethyme changed the title ~~[WIP] Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value~~ Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value Mar 22, 2019

audreymaniez reviewed Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

kasperisager approved these changes Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

annethyme requested a review from WilcoFiers March 26, 2019 14:30

ShadowBB previously requested changes Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

Updated test cases to match new appl/exp.

8f6342d

kasperisager previously requested changes Mar 27, 2019

View reviewed changes

_rules/SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Finish up test cases

881dca8

Update and rename SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-…

3f72b8d

…value.md to SC-1-3-1-aria-controls-for-scrollbar-has-valid-value.md

annethyme requested review from ShadowBB and kasperisager March 27, 2019 09:16

annethyme requested a review from audreymaniez March 27, 2019 09:16

ShadowBB approved these changes Mar 27, 2019

View reviewed changes

Update and rename SC-1-3-1-aria-controls-for-scrollbar-has-valid-valu…

fdb60b4

…e.md to SC-1-3-1-aria-controls-for-scrollbar-references-existing-element.md

carlosapaduarte approved these changes Mar 28, 2019

View reviewed changes

kasperisager approved these changes Mar 29, 2019

View reviewed changes

WilcoFiers previously requested changes Mar 29, 2019

View reviewed changes

Create SC4-1-2-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value.md

7264ed1

jeeyyy changed the base branch from master to develop April 12, 2019 11:34

annethyme added On hold April 30 deadline labels Apr 23, 2019

annethyme closed this Apr 29, 2019

annethyme mentioned this pull request Apr 29, 2019

Update Rule: ARIA state or property has valid value #365

Closed

annethyme removed the WAI-Tools Year 1.5 label Jul 18, 2019

Jym77 deleted the update-SC-1-3-1-required-aria-state-or-property-has-valid-value branch January 22, 2020 10:59

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value #441

Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value #441

annethyme commented Mar 14, 2019 •

edited

Loading

audreymaniez Mar 26, 2019

annethyme Mar 27, 2019

ShadowBB left a comment

ShadowBB Mar 26, 2019

ShadowBB Mar 26, 2019

ShadowBB Mar 26, 2019

ShadowBB Mar 26, 2019

ShadowBB Mar 26, 2019

annethyme Mar 27, 2019

annethyme Mar 27, 2019 •

edited

Loading

annethyme commented Mar 27, 2019

ShadowBB commented Mar 27, 2019

ShadowBB left a comment

audreymaniez commented Mar 28, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 28, 2019

WilcoFiers left a comment

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

WilcoFiers commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Apr 29, 2019

Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value #441

Rule update: ARIA state/property has valid value #441

Conversation

annethyme commented Mar 14, 2019 • edited Loading

How to Review And Approve

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ShadowBB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

annethyme Mar 27, 2019 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

annethyme commented Mar 27, 2019

ShadowBB commented Mar 27, 2019

ShadowBB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

audreymaniez commented Mar 28, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 28, 2019

WilcoFiers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 29, 2019

WilcoFiers commented Mar 29, 2019

annethyme commented Apr 29, 2019

annethyme commented Mar 14, 2019 •

edited

Loading

annethyme Mar 27, 2019 •

edited

Loading