W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cdf@w3.org > June 2006

Re: [WICD] focusable child elements / Action-383

From: Timur Mehrvarz <timur.mehrvarz@web.de>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 08:40:27 +0200
Message-Id: <B32552BF-D53D-4571-A272-51EA69F0FD3E@web.de>
Cc: public-cdf@w3.org
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>


On 25. Jun 2006, at 12:59, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 12:54:56 +0200, Timur Mehrvarz  
> <timur.mehrvarz@web.de> wrote:
>>
>> Agents should make child elements explicitly focusable, only if  
>> they require focus. (If they are interactive or contain links or  
>> whatever.) Elements that do not require focus (such as bitmap  
>> images and non interactive SVG) should - by default - not receive  
>> focus.
>
> So I agree it would be if all UAs followed the same model and I  
> hope they do so for the majority of the cases, but we shouldn't  
> prevent UAs from coming up with alternative (default) UIs if they  
> so desire. I guess a RFC 2119 SHOULD would cover that, but I'm not  
> entirely sure.

I would be fine, changing it to:

6.1
"Child elements should be treated like bitmap images, and should, by  
default, not be focusable."

>> With this, authors can make use of bitmap images and non  
>> interactive SVG elements, purely for style purposes. Without  
>> bringing down the usability of their documents at the same time.
>>
>> Agents may, of course, provide an alternative rendering mode, in  
>> which also non interactive SVG elements become focusable. But this  
>> should then probably also include bitmap images. (Btw, this is  
>> meant by "child elements must be treated like bitmap images". Not  
>> sure if this answers your question.)
>
> The problem I have with "child elements must be treated like bitmap  
> images" is that it seems to assume some default treatment for  
> bitmap images that isn't really clear from the text.

No, it should be read as "Whatever the default behavior is, for  
bitmap images, treat scalable child elements the same. Except, there  
are specific reasons to treat them differently."

Let's try to bring this to conclusion quickly. If you think the text  
needs other changes, then please provide alternative wording.

Timur
Received on Monday, 26 June 2006 06:39:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:41 GMT