Skip to content

Update aria-busy to reflect relaxed accessibility child constraints when true - #2754

Open
giacomo-petri wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
giacomo-petri-aria-busy-update
Open

Update aria-busy to reflect relaxed accessibility child constraints when true#2754
giacomo-petri wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
giacomo-petri-aria-busy-update

Conversation

@giacomo-petri

@giacomo-petri giacomo-petri commented Mar 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Netlify Preview:
🔄 this PR updates the following sspecs:

Closes #2737

This PR updates aria-busy content:

  • replaced "Allowed Accessibility Child Roles" with "accessibility children" in the condition clause; the term was originally "required owned elements" in ARIA 1.2, then changed to "allowed accessibility child roles" in ARIA 1.3, making the reference increasingly confusing and no longer meaningful in context
  • clarified author guidance for when aria-busy is set to true, permitting a temporarily non-conformant accessibility child structure during the update process, as discussed in the ARIA WG meeting
  • added a normative requirement (MUST) for authors to set aria-busy back to false once the content update is complete

Test, Documentation and Implementation tracking

Once this PR has been reviewed and has consensus from the working group, tests should be written and issues should be opened on browsers. Add N/A and check when not applicable.

  • "author MUST" tests:
  • "user agent MUST" tests:
  • Browser implementations (link to issue or commit):
    • WebKit:
    • Gecko:
    • Blink:
  • ACT review?
  • Does this need AT implementations?
  • Related APG Issue/PR:
  • MDN Issue/PR:

@giacomo-petri giacomo-petri self-assigned this Mar 20, 2026
@netlify

netlify Bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Preview for wai-aria ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit ae51022
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/wai-aria/deploys/6a76709381f2f90008e7684c
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-2754--wai-aria.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
🤖 Make changes Run an agent on this branch

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@github-actions
github-actions Bot temporarily deployed to pull request March 20, 2026 10:21 Inactive
pkra
pkra previously requested changes Mar 20, 2026
Comment thread index.html Outdated
branches are modified.
If changes to a rendered <rref>widget</rref> would create a state where the <rref>widget</rref> is modifying <a>accessibility children</a> during script
execution, authors MAY set <code>aria-busy</code> to <code>true</code> on the <rref>widget</rref> during the update process. While <code>aria-busy</code> is set to <code>true</code>,
the <rref>widget</rref> MAY temporarily contain invalid <a>accessibility children</a>. Authors MUST set <code>aria-busy</code> back to <code>false</code> once the update is complete.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The new MUST statement seems problematic to me. It does not seem testable since "once the update is complete" is an author decision.

I think it's more important to explain what happens when authors do not do this (e.g. AT may ignore the content marked busy).

I think a note, possibly including a warning on potential WCAG failures.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In that case, I'd move the example into the note.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that the author MUST is not testable with an automated static or generic test. However, I believe it is testable. I proposed some revisions to the wording that I believe could improve clarity and thus testability.

I think a clear, normative authoring requirement is of this nature is important.

@jnurthen
jnurthen requested review from jnurthen and mcking65 March 26, 2026 17:11
Comment thread index.html Outdated
Comment thread index.html Outdated
Comment thread index.html Outdated
Comment thread index.html Outdated
branches are modified.
If changes to a rendered <rref>widget</rref> would create a state where the <rref>widget</rref> is modifying <a>accessibility children</a> during script
execution, authors MAY set <code>aria-busy</code> to <code>true</code> on the <rref>widget</rref> during the update process. While <code>aria-busy</code> is set to <code>true</code>,
the <rref>widget</rref> MAY temporarily contain invalid <a>accessibility children</a>. Authors MUST set <code>aria-busy</code> back to <code>false</code> once the update is complete.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that the author MUST is not testable with an automated static or generic test. However, I believe it is testable. I proposed some revisions to the wording that I believe could improve clarity and thus testability.

I think a clear, normative authoring requirement is of this nature is important.

@github-actions
github-actions Bot temporarily deployed to pull request April 9, 2026 08:19 Inactive
@giacomo-petri

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@mcking65, I've incorporated your suggestions. I think it should be good now.

@pkra, the MUST is still there, but I agree with @mcking65 on this point.
Do you think the revised wording is working or do you still think we should remove the "MUST" bit?

@giacomo-petri
giacomo-petri requested review from mcking65 and pkra July 2, 2026 15:24
@pkra
pkra removed their request for review July 2, 2026 17:26
@pkra
pkra dismissed their stale review July 2, 2026 17:27

Taking myself off this PR. I won't have time for this in the near future.

@github-actions
github-actions Bot temporarily deployed to pull request August 7, 2026 23:57 Inactive

@jnurthen jnurthen left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM after the changes

@jnurthen

jnurthen commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@mcking65 can you please re-review

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

aria-busy="true" with descendant invalid ARIA structure

5 participants