W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2006

[whatwg] Dynamic content accessibility in HTML today

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 20:28:50 -0700
Message-ID: <D312EF30-BA6B-44B5-87F0-B11F39613382@apple.com>
The XBL code in the Safari tree is dead.   It's not compiled, and it  
was based on XBL1 (Mozilla's XBL) anyway.

dave

On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:56 PM, Matthew Raymond wrote:

> James Graham wrote:
>> Matthew Raymond wrote:
>>>    What Firefox is doing for DHTML accessibility has a very  
>>> narrow use
>>> case. It applies to DHTML widgets, that are not bound to fallback  
>>> markup
>>> using XBL [...]
>>
>> Without commenting (yet!) on the rest of this thread, I should  
>> just note
>> that any argument that relies on the near-future widespread  
>> deployment
>> of XBL is unconvincing. I would be extremely surprised if the  
>> entire XBL
>> spec is easier to implement than some targeted extensions to HTML,
>> therefore we shouldn't use it as a justification any more than any  
>> other
>> unlikely to be implemented soon technology.
>
>    Mozilla is committed to having XBL 2.0 implemented as early as
> version 3.0 of Firefox. Apple's WebCore has source code  
> specifically for
> XBL, so it isn't unreasonable to think that XBL will eventually be
> implemented for Safari and KHTML. Ian Hickson was an employee of Opera
> during most of the development of the XBL 2.0 draft, and the joint
> Mozilla-Opera position paper sent to the W3C talks about XBL, so  
> there's
> some reason to believe that they'll eventually support XBL as well.  
> So,
> chances are that only Microsoft won't have XBL 2.0 implemented within
> the next couple of years.
>
>    Still, you're right about ease of implementation. The |role|
> attribute is easier to implement, but that |class| is even easier
> because it's already there.
>
>>> [...] where a proper CSS presentation for the users primary media is
>>> not available [...]
>>
>> This is almost always the case on the real web.
>
>    Yeah, the web masters are so lazy that they can't be bothered to  
> add
> accessibility via CSS, but they'll be working overtime putting in | 
> role|
> attributes using the correct predefined values.
>
> /me rolls eyes.
>
>>>    I don't see a significant difference between |role| and  
>>> predefined
>>> values for |class|.
>>
>> Oh and I'm allergic to predefined class values :)
>
>    I would suggest a strong antihistamine whenever you use a  
> microformat.
Received on Saturday, 12 August 2006 20:28:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:28 UTC