-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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
Section 2C could be more clear for collapsed comboboxes #232
Comments
Since the combobox spec was updated on the more recent side of things, it's entirely plausible that ACCNAME could be updated to provide further clarification. Re: is it possible to have a combobox element that doesn't have a role of listbox:
This sentence in the spec suggests that it is possible to have a role other than listbox, and seems to be specific to things like the mentioned |
Discussion of value: #200 |
Here is Ben's related issue on ARIA, which we will probably close as it is about the combobox value and we already have issues for that: w3c/aria#2149 Additionally, this issue was discussed in the ARIA working group meeting, during new issue triage today: https://www.w3.org/2024/03/14-aria-minutes.html |
I think the key phrase in the spec is "of the chosen option." We could further clarify that this could be an empty string if no option is chosen or no option is present. Sometimes options will be dynamically rendered and there could be a state where the container is there but the options are not there (yet). So the TODO here is indeed to add some additional language to help browser authors. |
While working on this accname wpt with Daniel Clark, we stumbled upon the computation steps, section 2C, where it says:
However, in the combobox spec, it says:
We think (and are trying to confirm with the ARIA editors) that it's possible to have a combobox element that doesn't have a listbox and any option.
The combobox spec also says:
Which appears to indicate that a combobox without a listbox should have its name from its value, and its value computed from the descendants' content. Is that right? If that's the case, should we clarify the accname computation steps?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: