W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Widget Accessibility

From: Simon Harper <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:24:09 +0100
Message-Id: <8E7EA096-3BE8-4F05-98F8-246542E562B5@manchester.ac.uk>
Cc: marcosc@opera.com, public-webapps@w3.org
To: "Arve Bersvendsen" <arveb@opera.com>

On 14 Aug 2009, at 10:31, Arve Bersvendsen wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:45:14 +0200, Simon Harper
> <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> As far as I can see, the browser is the (JavaScript+HTML)  
>> interpreter, therefore a richer accessibility bridge is required,  
>> which will not be addressed by ARIA alone.
>
> Just to clarify something here: The Widgets P&C specification is  
> agnostic with regards to the underlying technology platform, and  
> does not actually require the content contained within the widget  
> to be web content/applications.  If you want to use "Widgets" as a  
> container/packaging format for, say, Windows or Linux applications,  
> you are most certainly free to do so (not that I would recommend  
> it, though).
>
> As such, I believe the widget space is the wrong arena to discuss  
> accessibility issues, unless some part of the widget family of  
> specifications directly prohibit accessible applications.
>

Thanks for the clarity, I just get excited that widgets may provide  
some really niffty accessibility enhancements as they did with Java -  
before the bridge and the accessifying of Java Swing widgets  
accessibility in Java was low (and bespoke) - after that things  
really started to move.

Cheers
Si

> -- 
> Arve Bersvendsen
>
> Opera Software ASA, http://www.opera.com/
>
Received on Friday, 14 August 2009 10:24:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:33 GMT