do we need a focusable definition

[jnurthen]

Followup from editors call: do we need a focusable definition

Defined(ish) in HTML and SVG - should we point to those definitions and how?

[jnurthen]

an example use case is in https://w3c.github.io/aria/#conflict_resolution_presentation_none

[MarioBatusic]

HTML gives a detailed but somewhat complex description of the focusable area. Furthermore there are some differences between browsers, in which situation is an element / area focusable and with wich method:

• script-focusable
• mouse-focusable
• tabbable (keyboard focusable) or
• touch focusable. I trink I will propose a very short explanation text with a link reference to the HTML spec focusable description.

[cookiecrook]

Current PR doesn't include a lot of the items discussed as necessary in the original PR attempt: https://github.com/w3c/aria-common/pull/39

[cookiecrook]

FWIW, I'm not sure I agree that an ARIA definition of "focusable" counts as "editorial."

[stes-acc]

Android even adds up the term screenreader-focusable ;):

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/android.views.view.screenreaderfocusable?view=xamarin-android-sdk-13

Well they mean the reading "focus" of Talkback, but annother example how widespread the term is used.

[MarioBatusic]

@cookiecrook writes in the comments to the old PR from 2020:

Clarifying: rather than making a new copy of the focusable definition in the ARIA spec, I think the ARIA definition should link to the HTML definition. I think that's what you intended, but I wanted to be clear.

Of course I studied all previous comments and I thought, we have only to informativly describe the concept of "focusable" and it would be enough to link to the colex and - I think - complete definition of "focusable" in the HTL spec. Why should we go into details in our glossary?