Wed Aug 1 07:28:53 PDT 2012
page in a div with an id value that indicates it is the 'main content'
is a common occurrence, this indicates that developers do this for
reasons other than accessibility as the majority do not include
role=main or use the div as a target for a skip link. What the main
element does is piggyback accessibility onto a common authoring
> Also, since few authors ever test how their
> page works in ATs, they won't know that there's a problem.
this is a problem, and it has begun to reveal itself due the misuse of
new elements such as <section> and <article>. the difference between
<main> and some of the other new elements is it is a simpler concept
and is unambiguously defined. It builds on the singular instance of
use per page (id value) rather than class names.
> This is like the difference between <a href=""> and <img longdesc="">. If
> many authors don't use <a href=""> right, big deal; their pages don't work
> well, but it doesn't stop other authors from using it. If many authors use
> longdesc="" incorrectly, however, it means users who try to use the
> feature quickly stop expecting it to work and they give up and even pages
> that use it correctly lose out.
drawing a comparison between longdesc and main here is fallacious:
longdesc is known to be used incorrectly much of the time while
role=main is known to be used correctly much of the time.
<div id=main> is known to be used correctly much of the time.
longdesc is bolt on accessibility requiring not only the correct use
of the attribute, but also the provision of extra authored content
that the attribute points to (i.e a lot of extra effort)
<main> is built in accessibility that sneaks accessibility in on the
back of a common authoring practise,i.e reduction of effort, much like
the <nav> element
> And, since few authors ever test how their
> page works in ATs, they don't know that there's a problem, and so the
> feature is _more_ likely to be broken than <a href="">.
that's why building accessibility into features that are based on
common authoring practises is a good thing.
More information about the webkit-dev