W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2011

[Bug 13436] Editorial changes to The Video element (4 of 5)

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 05:02:12 +0000
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Qs6MO-0002a8-Pp@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13436

--- Comment #10 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-08-13 05:02:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > (In reply to comment #7)
> > > (In reply to comment #6)
> > > "means that UAs have to follow it
> > > > unless they have a good reason not to."
> > > 
> > > This is a vague phrase that means very little from a technical perspective. The
> > > UA may decide the "good reason" is because they just don't feel like doing it.
> > > It's entirely subjective. 
> > 
> > You don't understand what the RFC 2119 keywords mean.  Please read
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
> 
> And the HTML5 spec states UAs "should" display the video control when scripting
> is disabled, yet only one UA does. So much for "should".

You don't understand how to file browser bugs.

> There is no reason not to provide a facility to choose tracks if the control is
> displayed. Well, unless there's a particular reason to deliberately disable
> video accessibility. Is there a reason to deliberately disable video
> accessibility? 
> 
> What is one good use case for not ensuring this capability?

The spec doesn't mandate UI.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 13 August 2011 05:02:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:43 GMT