WDYT about a console error in developer tools when there is no focus rule applied?
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 2:56 PM David Baron <dba...@chromium.org> wrote: > I think in theory it might make sense for focus outlines to use something > like an aggregation of child bounds. (The specifications even allow focus > outlines on regular elements to expand to contain the bounds of children.) > > However, in the case of display:contents, it would be hard to implement in > all browser engines (need to figure out responsibility for painting and > invalidating it), hard to specify (need to describe how it interacts with > visual effects... and also implement that interaction), hard to explain to > developers (doesn't fit with the normal model around how outlines are drawn > and how display:contents works), and probably hard to get standards > consensus around (for those same reasons). > > So my current preference is to allow display:contents elements to be > focusable and to make visual indication of the outline the developer's > problem (but perhaps still somewhat discourage having to go down that path). > > -David > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 12:49 PM Aaron Leventhal <alevent...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> Would an option for focus outlines to be to use the same idea we're >> discussing for AT bounding boxes? Namely, to use an aggregation of child >> outlines? >> >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 12:33 PM David Baron <dba...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> I think accumulating the rectangles of children seems like a good option >>> if we need to report a bounding box. It sounds like that's something else >>> where I need to test, and possibly change, our current behavior for >>> elements with display:contents. >>> >>> Regarding focus outlines: these elements won't draw focus outlines. >>> This is definitely a tradeoff. As I wrote in >>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/164#issuecomment-1708822339 >>> : >>> >>> So I think my preference for outline is that we say that if a developer >>> is going to depend on focusability of something with display: contents, >>> they need to add appropriate styles to draw the focus outline (for example, >>> by drawing it on an appropriate descendant or descendants). >>> >>> I admit that developers aren't going to get that right all the time. But >>> the same is true of the current situation. That is, I think developers will >>> sometimes not do what we want if we say either of: >>> >>> >>> - developers shouldn't use display: contents if they need an element >>> to be focusable, or >>> - developers should add appropriate focus styles if they use >>> display: contents on something that is focusable. >>> >>> (Note that needing an element to be focusable is often a need for users >>> using keyboard navigation or similar, that may not apply to users using a >>> mouse. So developers may well miss it.) >>> >>> Then the question is which problem is worse: is it worse to have an >>> element that the user needs to get to but that can't be focused at all, or >>> worse to have it be focusable but without a good indication that it's >>> focused. The latter at least gives a keyboard user a chance to figure out >>> what's going on, whereas with the former they're out of luck. So my >>> inclination is that having the element be focusable but without an >>> indication of focus is less bad than having it not be focusable at all when >>> it should be. I admit that this is just my instinct and I haven't attempted >>> to confirm this. And there's also the confounding factor that the two >>> problems might occur at different rates. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 11:46 AM Aaron Leventhal <alevent...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> And (duh to myself), we need to compute a bounding box for our own >>>> focus outline. >>>> >>>> Apologies if this is answered elsewhere. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 11:45 AM Aaron Leventhal < >>>> alevent...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Interesting. How will the bounding box be reported via a11y APIs? >>>>> >>>>> Examples of where this is used: >>>>> 1. ATs for low vision users that draw a box around the focus and/or >>>>> move the focus onscreen (especially for a magnifier that is only showing >>>>> part of the actual screen's contents in a virtual viewport). >>>>> 2. Voice Input: used to show numbers next to the item when several >>>>> things have the same name, e.g. a bunch of links labelled "click here". >>>>> 3. Single switch ATs: for highlighting an item that the user can select >>>>> >>>>> One answer might be to accumulate the rectangles of all children and >>>>> to use that. Not sure what the algorithm would do for out-of-flow >>>>> children. >>>>> >>>>> Aaron >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 11:39 AM David Baron <dba...@chromium.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Contact emailsdba...@chromium.org >>>>>> >>>>>> ExplainerNone >>>>>> >>>>>> Specification >>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2632#issuecomment-438851770 >>>>>> >>>>>> Summary >>>>>> >>>>>> This change means that elements that have CSS display:contents can be >>>>>> focusable. In other words, if they would have been focusable without >>>>>> display:contents, display:contents will no longer change that. Before >>>>>> this >>>>>> change, elements with display:contents could never be focused. Developers >>>>>> making elements with display:contents that can be focused need to ensure >>>>>> that such elements have appropriate styles to make the focus visually >>>>>> apparent, since they will not have a default focus outline. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Blink componentBlink>HTML>Focus >>>>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EHTML%3EFocus> >>>>>> >>>>>> Motivation >>>>>> >>>>>> Elements with display:contents are exposed to assistive technology as >>>>>> having their normal roles (as though they had their default display). The >>>>>> contract for the meaning of accessibility roles includes support for >>>>>> certain role-specific keyboard interactions which often include >>>>>> focusability. So it's important that the exposure to AT match the >>>>>> focusability. The CSS Working Group has concluded that both AT exposure >>>>>> and >>>>>> focusability should be as-normal. Prior to this change, AT exposure was >>>>>> interoperably as specified, but such elements were interoperably not >>>>>> focusable. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Search tagsCSS <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:CSS>, a11y >>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:a11y>, accessibility >>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:accessibility>, focus >>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/features#tags:focus> >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG reviewNone >>>>>> >>>>>> TAG review statusNot applicable >>>>>> >>>>>> Risks >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>>>> >>>>>> This is proposing to change a currently interoperable behavior. This >>>>>> has some risk that other engines won't match the change and we'll end up >>>>>> with less interoperability. However, I think there is probably enough >>>>>> support from other engines at this point that we should take the lead and >>>>>> hope that other engines will soon follow. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Gecko*: Positive ( >>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/772) >>>>>> >>>>>> *WebKit*: No signal ( >>>>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/164) No >>>>>> official position but >>>>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/568 does show >>>>>> Safari interest in the topic. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Web developers*: No signals >>>>>> >>>>>> *Other signals*: Positive advocacy from users / user advocates such >>>>>> as in https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1366037 >>>>>> and https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/568 >>>>>> >>>>>> Activation >>>>>> >>>>>> This fixes what appears to be one of the obstacles for developers to >>>>>> use display:contents in a way that is accessible. While in the short term >>>>>> it reduces interoperability (since engines agree on the current "bad" >>>>>> behavior), the long term goal is that engines will converge on the new >>>>>> behavior, and this will lead to increased developer confidence in and >>>>>> increased usability of CSS display:contents. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> WebView application risks >>>>>> >>>>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>>>> >>>>>> None >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Debuggability >>>>>> >>>>>> None >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?Yes >>>>>> >>>>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>>>> ?Yes >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/39247 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Flag name on chrome://flagsNone >>>>>> >>>>>> Finch feature namekDisplayContentsFocusable >>>>>> >>>>>> Requires code in //chrome?False >>>>>> >>>>>> Tracking bug >>>>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1366037 >>>>>> >>>>>> Estimated milestones >>>>>> >>>>>> No milestones specified >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>>>> >>>>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat >>>>>> or interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github >>>>>> issues in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >>>>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure >>>>>> of >>>>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>>>> None >>>>>> >>>>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6237396851228672 >>>>>> >>>>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>>>> <https://chromestatus.com/> and edited by hand. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>> send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3irORkF9G%3Dkr-KJF0hvoYbTpdpmYordQ1qi6w3s2jd5Fw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3irORkF9G%3Dkr-KJF0hvoYbTpdpmYordQ1qi6w3s2jd5Fw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3gOw1Bmzv0mVsA-PeYRyJDRWYEgShedyErcktooY0jovw%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAG0MU3gOw1Bmzv0mVsA-PeYRyJDRWYEgShedyErcktooY0jovw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAC2P9Wnhmv4t2Ewwsoj2WEBaqvRV0jUN4atP550O1Y6pUoTx6w%40mail.gmail.com.
