W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

RE: comments

From: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 12:53:09 -0500
To: <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Cc: <marcosc@opera.com>, "'Robin Berjon'" <robin@berjon.com>, <public-webapps@w3.org>, "'UAWG list'" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <09d201cb0345$a14ee4c0$e3ecae40$@tsbvi.edu>
Thanks to Dave for providing UAWG access to the changed language. 
We are ok with the changes.

Thanks for letting us comment late.

Jim 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Allan [mailto:jimallan@tsbvi.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 8:59 AM
> To: 'art.barstow@nokia.com'
> Cc: 'marcosc@opera.com'; 'Robin Berjon'; 'public-webapps@w3.org'; 'UAWG
> list'
> Subject: RE: comments
> 
> UAWG is having a meeting today. I don't anticipate any issues. Will send you
> something after the meeting.
> Jim
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]
> On
> > Behalf Of Arthur Barstow
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 8:08 AM
> > To: jimallan@tsbvi.edu
> > Cc: marcosc@opera.com; Robin Berjon; public-webapps@w3.org; UAWG list
> > Subject: Re: comments
> >
> > On 5/28/10 2:15 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Robin Berjon<robin@berjon.com>  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Jim,
> > >>
> > >> your comments reach us right after the WG decided to take the
> > >> specification to CR, but thankfully I was a bit slow with the
> > >> editing so that we could take them into account :)
> > >>
> > >> On May 27, 2010, at 22:42 , Jim Allan wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> View-mode: fullscreen. It is not clear whether fullscreen includes
> > >>> a full set of chrome, or includes no chrome.  You mention 'chrome'
> > >>> in the 'windowed' and 'floating' viewmodes. For consistency,
> > >>> chrome presence should be noted in fullscreen.
> > >>>
> > >> That's correct, I've now clarified this by adding a mention of
> > >> chrome for
> > both fullscreen and maximized.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> It should be noted that the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
> > >>> 2.0 [1] has success criteria that allow the user to override
> > >>> author settings for a variety of viewport view-modes including the
> > >>> inclusion/exclusion of 'chrome.'
> > >>>
> > >> Yes, and that's fine. The idea here is that the UA would make a
> > >> best effort
> > at matching the intent in a way that makes sense rather than be ultra strict.
> > For instance, if the app goes fullscreen but keeps a teeny bit of
> > chrome (at user option or not) to make it easier to exit fullscreen,
> > then matching the
> > view-mode: fullscreen media query is quite clearly the right thing to do.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Please consider including a statement such as "The user agent
> > >>> *must* display the view-modes in a manner that meets the
> > >>> accessibility guidelines of UAAG20. "
> > >>>
> > >> As much as I'd like more UAs to support UAAG I don't think that
> > >> this
> > requirement is appropriate here. The VM specification defines a
> > technology with a single purpose: "if the window in which the content
> > is being rendered is like this, then apply these CSS style rules". It
> > does *not* define how a UA ought to display an actual set of window
> > states, it doesn't in fact even require UAs to support all the view
> > modes. I'd expect that an application running on an iPhone would only
> > support maximized and fullscreen — if it applied different style rules for
> each, it would still be 100% conformant.
> > >>
> > >>
> > > FWIW, I agree with Robin here.
> > >
> > I also agree with Robin and Marcos.
> >
> > Jim, WAI UA community - please let us know (as soon as possible)
> > whether or not Robin's response and edits adequately address your
> comments.
> >
> > -Regards, Art Barstow
> >
> >
> >
Received on Thursday, 3 June 2010 17:48:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT