In https://w3c.github.io/aria/#document-handling_author-errors_roles we have:
Certain landmark roles require names from authors. In situations where an author has not specified names for these landmarks, it is considered an authoring error. The user agent MUST treat such elements as if no role had been provided. If a valid fallback role had been specified, or if the element had an implicit ARIA role, then user agents would continue to expose that role, instead. Instances of such roles are as follows:
form
region
Also, core-aam only has a note in https://w3c.github.io/core-aam/#roleMappingComputedRole covering parent/child roles and later links to Sec 9.2 (for aria-value***).
ARIA no longer requires a name for form while https://w3c.github.io/core-aam/#role-map-form gives the computed role as "form" while the AAPI specific mappings seem to negate that. That might just be a "typo" in core-aam since it otherwise matches region. Reversely, if form is treated like name-required in core-aam, does it matter that ARIA no longer requires a name.
Also, recently #2599 (comment) seemed to imply that a group without name will (effectively) be ignored on some platforms. And we have things like #2543 where we acknowledge that without a name, there will likely be no exposure of sectionfooter/header. Perhaps there's also room for clarification as to what happens when a role that only allows name-from-author does not have a name.
In https://w3c.github.io/aria/#document-handling_author-errors_roles we have:
Also, core-aam only has a note in https://w3c.github.io/core-aam/#roleMappingComputedRole covering parent/child roles and later links to Sec 9.2 (for aria-value***).
ARIA no longer requires a name for
formwhile https://w3c.github.io/core-aam/#role-map-form gives the computed role as "form" while the AAPI specific mappings seem to negate that. That might just be a "typo" in core-aam since it otherwise matches region. Reversely, if form is treated like name-required in core-aam, does it matter that ARIA no longer requires a name.Also, recently #2599 (comment) seemed to imply that a group without name will (effectively) be ignored on some platforms. And we have things like #2543 where we acknowledge that without a name, there will likely be no exposure of sectionfooter/header. Perhaps there's also room for clarification as to what happens when a role that only allows name-from-author does not have a name.