User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; Tablet PC 2.0; MALC)
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:22.214.171.124) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13
1. Open the URL.
Note that the map tag that encloses the two page tabs (Biblio and Help) is not exposed to assistive technology.
Isn't this incorrect use of html? Not sure whether we should do anything here -- at least not for FF4. We assume maps are for image maps.
This seems to have regressed. I remember bug 431615 having fixed this once. We also have test coverage, or at least I thought we had, but for some reason, this got lost at some point. We do get an accessible for the links map, but we don't test the links underneath anymore in our mochitests.
Yes, this is probably a poor use of the map tag, but doesn't it still point out a FF problem?
Created attachment 563974 [details] [diff] [review]
Comment on attachment 563974 [details] [diff] [review]
r=me with one nit:
>+ // be used in conjuction with HTML image element and in this case we don't
typo: Conjunction (a missing n).
Also I wonder whether we should combine the test from tests/hyperlink/test_general.html into this one, too. There, we also only test if the links get created at all inside the map. What do you think?
(In reply to Marco Zehe (:MarcoZ) from comment #5)
> Also I wonder whether we should combine the test from
> tests/hyperlink/test_general.html into this one, too. There, we also only
> test if the links get created at all inside the map. What do you think?
map used for grouping is just generic hypertext accessible. All we need is to make sure accessibles for map and its children are created in this case. Hyperlink tests aren't necessary I think because don't test new paths of code logic.
inbound land http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/628c7f04dbbc