Conformance checkers that claim support for checking of ARIA in HTML, MUST implement checks for the document conformance requirements for use of the ARIA role and aria-* attributes on HTML elements as defined in this specification.
The "document conformance requirements" are ambiguous. At least, I can't figure them out. I was expecting:
"A document MUST/SHOULD/MAY" in the spec, but no such conformance class appears in the document.
If we want "conformance checkers" to be a class of software that can claim conformance to this specifications, then there should be clear "Conformance checkers MUST/SHOULD/MAY...".
Documents MUST NOT use any role values with elements in the § 2. Document conformance requirements for use of ARIA attributes in HTML table, other than the corresponding role value (if any) as listed for that element in the third column, other than those indicated in the second column (whose explicit use in markup is NOT RECOMMENDED).
These second conformance requirement seems quite silly: "Don't use section 2, use section 2!"
I'd suggest remove both of the conformance requirements above, particularly the second one: the whole, "in the third column, other than those indicated in the second column". That's mega confusing to make any sense of.
The spec says:
The "document conformance requirements" are ambiguous. At least, I can't figure them out. I was expecting:
"A document MUST/SHOULD/MAY" in the spec, but no such conformance class appears in the document.
If we want "conformance checkers" to be a class of software that can claim conformance to this specifications, then there should be clear "Conformance checkers MUST/SHOULD/MAY...".
These second conformance requirement seems quite silly: "Don't use section 2, use section 2!"
I'd suggest remove both of the conformance requirements above, particularly the second one: the whole, "in the third column, other than those indicated in the second column". That's mega confusing to make any sense of.