Replace aria-datatype and evolve contenteditable

<op.uaubzai2idj3kv@hp-a0a83fcd39d2.belkin>

Current votes: None.


This email contains two related rough proposals/thoughts for the ARIA sp=
ec  =

and the HTML 5 spec:

   1. Replace aria-datatype with something that works in HTML.
   2. Perhaps evolve HTML 5 contenteditable to support WF2 features.


Regarding http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/#datatype

aria-datatype seems to be incompatible with HTML requiring QNames with  =

associated namespace declarations being in scope, since text/html doesn'=
t  =

support namespace declarations. (Moreover, it's unclear how to implement=
  =

aria-datatype and XSD seems suboptimal; see  =

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pfwg-comments/2008JanMar/0062=
.html  =

.)

For ARIA, I'd suggest to align with or adopt data types in Web Forms 2.0=
,  =

in particular <input type=3Demail>, <input type=3Durl> and the pattern=3D=
''  =

attribute.

    http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-forms/current-work/#email
    http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-forms/current-work/#url
    http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-forms/current-work/#pattern

(The other values for type=3D'' are not really appliciable, AFAICT.)

Since ARIA datatypes are, AIUI, expected to be used on any user editable=
  =

region, including <div contenteditable=3Dtrue>, this begs the question a=
s to  =

whether HTML 5 should adopt WF2 type=3D'email', type=3D'url' and pattern=
=3D''  =

for contenteditable elements as well. Either they are useful for  =

contenteditable, and HTML 5 should have them, or they are not, and ARIA =
 =

should restrict its data types to HTML <input> (and <textarea> for  =

pattern=3D'') (in which case, ARIA can simply drop aria-datatype and let=
 the  =

above WF2 features replace it, or adopt the WF2 features without aria-  =

prefix as with tabindex).

If the former, then should readonly, disabled, required, etc. also apply=
  =

to contenteditable? It would make sense as far as AT exposure goes, but =
 =

contenteditable doesn't take part of WF2 form validation or submission, =
so  =

it would be a bit inconsistent. Perhaps there should be an attribute on =
 =

<div> saying that the element is a form control that accepts normal form=
  =

control related attributes and takes part of form validation and, if the=
  =

element is successful, submits its innerHTML. (Same with <iframe> in  =

combination with designMode, submitting its contentDocument.innerHTML?)

-- =

Simon Pieters
Opera Software