- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 12:05:20 +0200
- To: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis" <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Cc: "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, "Geoff Freed" <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>, "Richard Schwerdtfeger" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "Steve Faulkner" <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>
On Fri, 06 May 2011 03:04:28 +0200, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
<bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Laura Carlson
> <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 10.6.1 USER AGENT RENDERING (informative)
>> http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/research/ld-rendering.html
>>
>> I have updated the 10.6.1 User Agent rendering draft trying to
>> incorporate Chaals suggestion to add info on real world
>> implementations and Leif's suggestion to add info on iCab's
>> contextual-menu cursor. Is it okay?
> I'm not sure about this. It seems highly unusual for a W3C
> spec to refer to particular implementations by name. I think
> it would be better to use their implementations to inform our
> examples of how to implement them.
> Chaals, did you really mean the spec text should call out existing
> implementations by name?
Oh. No, I think the CP should call out the implementations used for
demonstration by name. Spec text should be wary of sounding like it has
*the* answers for how to do UI, since after a while people often figure
out how to do it better... and specific implementations go in and out of
style.
cheers
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Friday, 6 May 2011 10:06:04 UTC