associationlist and related roles have tediously long names

[cookiecrook]

associationlist and related roles have tediously long names. These look like ObjC naming conventions: associationlist:item:value: ;-)

associationlist: A section containing associationlistitemkey and associationlistitemvalue elements.
associationlistitemkey: A single key item in an association list.
associationlistitemvalue: A single value item in an association list.

I don't have a particular preference other than "not what's there" but in the interest of forwarding the discussion, I'd suggest the following:

1. Remove associationlist entirely. I don't think there needs to be any distinction between list and associationlist in the Accessibility APIs.
2. listitemkey and listitemvalue may be sufficient. It's possible listitemvalue could be an alias of listitem… I'm not certain, but the existence of a key may be all that's needed to distinguish between standard lists (~html:ol/html:ul) and these (~html:dl)

[pkra]

Related: #961

[smhigley]

+1 to the first option

[brennanyoung]

It would simplify matters to permit the key/value roles inside list, whatever they may be called. (I agree the currently suggested names are too long).

What happens if people use key & value elements and plain listitem elements in the same list? Is that a problem?

If this is about parity with HTML, it should not be allowed, but I can imagine cases where it would be useful to do so. (e.g. if there is a placeholder listitem for an as-yet-unknown key-value pair).

[pkra]

I'm in favor of the OP.

I have a slight preference for keeping listitemvalue (or whatever name we come up with) separate from listitem because of the different (possible) structure of 1 DT followed by multiple DDs.

[scottaohara]

@jnurthen going to add myself here as a second assignee. we can discuss / i can do the associated HTML AAM stuffs.