Closed mcking65 closed 1 month ago
The thing with techniques is though: not following the technique does not mean an authors necessarily fails the SC. Techniques are but one way of passing an SC. They're not comprehensive or complete, so the current G65 does not preclude authors from actually using aria-current
and having the current page as a link.
So sure, G65 could be expanded to also show an example of this different approach (as both are valid for the purposes of the SC). Or a new technique could be created purely for the variant with link and aria-current
.
seems G65 could just be modified a bit to allude to the fact that either are ok.
That reminds me that I wrote a technique for aria-current
in 2021.
The tests in G65: Providing a breadcrumb trail | WAI | W3C prohibit authors from implementing the current location in a breadcrumb trail as a link.
This is a proposal to change the G65 tests so the current location can optionally be represented by a link with
aria-current="page"
by revising the check as follows:The revised technique could also reference the ARIA Authoring Practices Guide for a supporting example.
Why?
Rationale
The breadcrumb example in the ARIA Authoring Practices Guide implements the current location as a link.
The APG task force recently became aware of this difference between the APG and WCAG technique when the task force received this issue -- Should the current location on a breadcrumb trail be an anchor element? · Issue #3047 · w3c/aria-practices
The APG task force chose to use a link for current location because:
aria-current
.If the current location is plain text, the meaning of the text depends entirely on the surrounding context. While that is not an unreasonable dependency, it is an unnecessary dependency for the breadcrumb pattern because the dependency can be removed by using a link with
aria-current
instead of plain text.