[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 233383] AX: aria-owns in trees results duplicate rows, third level rows not being exposed
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
Wed Dec 1 09:51:32 PST 2021
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233383
--- Comment #8 from Sepand Parhami <sparhami at apple.com> ---
(In reply to Tyler Wilcock from comment #4)
> Does this patch make us more susceptible to circular element references?
>
> https://w3c.github.io/aria/#aria-owns
>
> > Authors MUST ensure that an element's ID is not specified in more than one other element's aria-owns attribute at any time. In other words, an element can have only one explicit owner. Authors MUST NOT create circular references with aria-owns. In the case of authoring error with aria-owns, the user agent MAY ignore some aria-owns element references in order to build a consistent model of the content.
I think with this patch as-is, a circular reference would be a problem. I think my original approach was okay, but this I think this part is a problem:
```
// Hopefully a flow that does not occur often in practice, but if someone were to include
// the owned child ealier in the top level of the tree, then reference via aria-owns later,
// move it to the right place.
if (result.contains(child))
result.removeFirst(child);
```
Originally, I skipped here, but in order to handle out of order tree items, I added this logic. Need to re-evaluate my approach here.
--- Comment #9 from Sepand Parhami <sparhami at apple.com> ---
(In reply to Tyler Wilcock from comment #4)
> Does this patch make us more susceptible to circular element references?
>
> https://w3c.github.io/aria/#aria-owns
>
> > Authors MUST ensure that an element's ID is not specified in more than one other element's aria-owns attribute at any time. In other words, an element can have only one explicit owner. Authors MUST NOT create circular references with aria-owns. In the case of authoring error with aria-owns, the user agent MAY ignore some aria-owns element references in order to build a consistent model of the content.
I think with this patch as-is, a circular reference would be a problem. I think my original approach was okay, but this I think this part is a problem:
```
// Hopefully a flow that does not occur often in practice, but if someone were to include
// the owned child ealier in the top level of the tree, then reference via aria-owns later,
// move it to the right place.
if (result.contains(child))
result.removeFirst(child);
```
Originally, I skipped here, but in order to handle out of order tree items, I added this logic. Need to re-evaluate my approach here.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-unassigned/attachments/20211201/07c03a17/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the webkit-unassigned
mailing list