W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > May 2008

Re: XHTML Access module CR exit criteria

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 05:09:21 -0500
Message-ID: <483151D1.6060801@aptest.com>
To: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
CC: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>

Oh my goodness.... I am losing my mind.  I will fix the draft this 
morning and we can proceed to last call at once.

Roland Merrick wrote:
>
> Greetings Shane, I think that the reason we have not discussed CR Exit 
> Criteria for  XHTML Access module is that we have not been through 
> Last Call yet. Our resolution last week [1] was to proceeed to Last Call.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/14-xhtml-minutes#item06
>
> Regards, Roland
>
>
> *Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>*
> Sent by: public-xhtml2-request@w3.org
>
> 17/05/2008 17:14
>
> 	
> To
> 	XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	XHTML Access module CR exit criteria
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I have completed incorporating the edits from the UAWG, and am now
> preparing a draft for a CR transition call as per the resolution at our
> meeting on Wednesday (I will push an editor's draft shortly via
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#xhtml-access).  However, it occurred to
> me that we have never discussed exit criteria for this module
> specifically.  As I see if, there are two ways we can go:
>
>   1. We decide that this module is just a component, and like @role has
>      no tangible use when it is free standing.  As a result, the CR
>      exit criteria could be the use of the module in some markup
>      language definitions to demonstrate that the implementation(s) of
>      the module work within the modularization framework.
>   2. We decide that since this module actually mandates some behavior
>      when it is used, the exit criteria should be that some user agents
>      implement that behavior in a conforming way (either natively or
>      through a plug in).
>
> Obviously, the first gets us through CR more quickly. The second might
> be more appropriate since there are behaviors we require (change of
> focus, actuation or not, user agent and user override of key mappings).
>
> I plan to produce an example markup language using the module (and
> xhtml-role) so that we can write and validate sample documents.  I think
> this action would satisfy condition 1 above.  For 2, I would need
> someone to help with creation of an implementation - I am pretty
> confident it could be implemented via scripting in the more flexible
> current user agents, but I just dont have the cycles right now.
>
> Thoughts???
>
> -- 
> Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
> Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
> ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> /
> /
>
> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with 
> number 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 
> 3AU/
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Monday, 19 May 2008 10:12:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 February 2010 18:12:48 GMT