Skip to content
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

Disclosure: Distinguish the widget from the control #1880

Conversation

jonathantneal
Copy link
Contributor

@jonathantneal jonathantneal commented Apr 27, 2021

This PR updates the document to distinguish the disclosure widget from the disclosure control.

At first, the document refers to the disclosure as the button, but then later refers to that button as the disclosure control.


Note: If widget is not the appropriate term, the disclosure examples [1] [2] [3] [4] refer to it as a design pattern.


Preview | Diff

Copy link
Contributor

@carmacleod carmacleod left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1
I think this does make it clearer. :)
Thanks, @jonathantneal !

@jonathantneal
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, @carmacleod!

Is there anything else I can do to help keep this PR moving along, or to help get it placed into the right queue for additional approval or rejection? I’m unsure if there is more to the process that I should be doing.

I hope this ping is helpfully persistent, or rather that it is not annoyingly impatient! 😄

@mcking65 mcking65 added the agenda Include in upcoming Authoring Practices Task Force meeting label May 4, 2021
@carmacleod carmacleod requested a review from mcking65 May 4, 2021 20:09
@carmacleod
Copy link
Contributor

@jonathantneal
Thanks for the ping!
I have requested a review from @mcking65

Copy link
Contributor

@mcking65 mcking65 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jonathantneal

Thank you for the PR. The task force discussed it at this week's meeting.

We agree with the issue. We had two concerns with the proposal as is:

  1. It didn't make it really clear that the disclosure widget has 2 elements.
  2. The word "typically" implied the control could be something other than a button.

I have proposed some revisions to address these concerns. Please accept or revise them.

aria-practices.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aria-practices.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
aria-practices.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jonathantneal and others added 3 commits June 2, 2021 11:40
Co-authored-by: Matt King <a11yThinker@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Matt King <a11yThinker@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Matt King <a11yThinker@Gmail.com>
@jonathantneal
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mcking65

Sorry for the delay. Thank you for discussing my PR for offering revisions. I’ve accepted all of them. Let me know if there is anything else I can do to help keep this PR moving along. 😄

Copy link
Contributor

@mcking65 mcking65 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jonathantneal thank you for raising this issue and proposing the changes!

@mcking65 mcking65 merged commit a4fddcb into w3c:main Jun 2, 2021
@mcking65 mcking65 added documentation editorial Changes to prose that don't alter intended meaning, e.g., phrasing, grammar. May fix inaccuracies. Pattern Page Related to a page documenting a Pattern and removed agenda Include in upcoming Authoring Practices Task Force meeting labels Jun 2, 2021
@mcking65 mcking65 added this to the 1.2 Release 1 milestone Jun 2, 2021
@jonathantneal jonathantneal deleted the jn.distinguish-disclosure-widget-vs-disclosure-button branch June 7, 2021 13:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
editorial Changes to prose that don't alter intended meaning, e.g., phrasing, grammar. May fix inaccuracies. Pattern Page Related to a page documenting a Pattern
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants