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

role "doc-endnote" not allowed on "li" element #1041

Closed
thiagoeec opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 9 comments · Fixed by #1042
Closed

role "doc-endnote" not allowed on "li" element #1041

thiagoeec opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 9 comments · Fixed by #1042
Assignees
Labels
priority: high To be processed and published in the next release spec: EPUB 3.x Impacting the support of EPUB 3.x specifications status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request type: false-positive This issue is about valid content being incorrectly rejected
Milestone

Comments

@thiagoeec
Copy link

Hi everyone.

Acording to the Epub Type to ARIA Role Authoring Guide, the "doc-endnote" should be used on "li" elements (or inside a "div" with "list" role).

But when I tried the Example 17 in the specfications, I got this error:

ERROR(RSC-005): Notas.xhtml(13,88): Error while parsing file: value of attribute "role" is invalid; must be equal to "listitem", "menuitem", "menuitemcheckbox", "menuitemradio", "none", "option", "presentation", "radio", "separator", "tab" or "treeitem"

Is this a bug?

@rdeltour
Copy link
Member

I could reproduce. Apparently the role is rejected on li children of ol, but accepted on li children of ul, which indeed looks like a bug.

I'll submit a PR to the upstream HTML schemas, and will port the fix to the next version.

Thanks for the report!

@rdeltour rdeltour self-assigned this Apr 24, 2019
@rdeltour rdeltour added priority: high To be processed and published in the next release spec: EPUB 3.x Impacting the support of EPUB 3.x specifications status: in progress The issue is being implemented by the development team type: false-positive This issue is about valid content being incorrectly rejected labels Apr 24, 2019
@rdeltour rdeltour added this to the 4.2.1 milestone Apr 24, 2019
rdeltour added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 24, 2019
@rdeltour rdeltour added status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request and removed status: in progress The issue is being implemented by the development team labels Apr 24, 2019
@rdeltour
Copy link
Member

I'll submit a PR to the upstream HTML schemas

Done in validator/validator#794

@flittle8
Copy link

flittle8 commented May 14, 2019

@rdeltour I'm getting this error as well, and I'm using the epubcheck v1.9.1. (epubcheck 4.2.0.)

@rdeltour
Copy link
Member

FYI, this has now been released in EPUBCheck v4.2.1!

@flittle8
Copy link

@rdeltour is this update command line only? when I attempt to update via the app it says there are no updates. cheers

@rdeltour
Copy link
Member

@rdeltour is this update command line only? when I attempt to update via the app it says there are no updates. cheers

Yes, the “official” EPUBCheck project is command line only. By “the app” i'm guessing you're talking about pagina's EPUB-Checker; this is a separate project volunteered by @tofi86 for pagina GmbH. Usually they're pretty fast in releasing an update; you can track the project or file specific issues on their GitHub repository.

@tofi86
Copy link
Collaborator

tofi86 commented May 20, 2019

I'll try to release an update of "pagina EPUB-Checker" this evening or tomorrow.

@flittle8
Copy link

@tofi86 awesome, thank you!

@tofi86
Copy link
Collaborator

tofi86 commented May 21, 2019

"pagina EPUB-Checker" version 1.9.2 has just been released: https://twitter.com/paginagmbh/status/1130946567698112519

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority: high To be processed and published in the next release spec: EPUB 3.x Impacting the support of EPUB 3.x specifications status: has PR The issue is being processed in a pull request type: false-positive This issue is about valid content being incorrectly rejected
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants