W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2012

Re: ISSUE-201: Aligning the two change proposals

From: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:02:30 -0700
To: public-html@w3.org
Message-id: <m24npl7qwp.fsf@eoconnor.apple.com>
Hi Steve,

You wrote:

> what is the source of the note? Is it in your CP?

It's from r7029, which is one of the revisions my CP aims to restore to
the W3C version of the spec.

> How is the region associated with the control since the region can
> have no properties added which define a relationship between them?

Each hit region has an associated control, which is either an element or
an unbacked region description. You pass in the control when you call
addHitRegion(). Is this unclear in the spec text?

> Soon as an author wants to go beyond simple grouping objects, they can
> no longer use the lightweight objects anyway as no relationship
> properties can be added to the lightweight objects.

We should make the easy things easy and the hard things possible.
Allowing hit regions to be associated with either unbacked region
descriptions or elements allows for this: if you have a complex thing
which requires WAI-ARIA states and properties to describe, use an
element. If not, use an unbacked region description.


HTH,
Ted
Received on Thursday, 5 July 2012 23:02:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:33 UTC