W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Access Key alternative -in the wrong place?

From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 00:16:39 +0200
To: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Becky Gibson <gibsonb@us.ibm.com>, Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>, Liddy Nevile <liddy.nevile@motile.net>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf-request@w3.org, wai-gl@w3c.org
Message-id: <02df01c4685d$e9051c50$ce59003e@IBMA4E63BE0B9E>

Rich: Browsers need to map RDF to an API to describe how to interact with an object. This requires a good RDF parser. 
there are good RDF parsers, open source or proprietary..
the RDF is in a header file so the browser does not need to parse anything

I am with Jim on not understanding the problem hear

Rich: Furthermore, it is becoming less likely that transcending will be done in the middleware to process it since more often than not the UI will be constructed on the client. 

lisa: AT can integrate it directly, as they start to support new features - RDF does not mean you have to use the SWAP type architecture, just SWAP type meaning...

Rich Schwerdtfeger
STSM, Software Group Accessibility Strategist/Master Inventor
Emerging Internet Technologies
Chair, IBM Accessibility Architecture Review Board
schwer@us.ibm.com, Phone: 512-838-4593,T/L: 678-4593

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - 
I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.", Frost

Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>

              Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com> 
              Sent by: w3c-wai-pf-request@w3.org 
              07/10/2004 06:17 AM

            Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 

            Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>, Becky Gibson/Westford/IBM@Iris, Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>, Liddy Nevile <liddy.nevile@motile.net>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, wai-gl@w3c.org 

            Re: Access Key alternative -in the wrong place? 

Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
>Another concern that is growing for me is RDF. One of the problems we
>are faced with on RDF is that NO browser supports it.

I'm not exactly sure how you suggest browsers should or need to
support RDF for this, it's not being served up to a user as bare RDF,
but simply using RDF to provide useful additional metadata.

The metadata need not be consumed by mainstream browsers, indeed I'm
not sure what usefulness mozilla would have in doing so to the
majority of its users, however it's easy to extend the browser with
plugins to provide the functionality in an AT sense.

Or do you propose inventing a new metadata format?


(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Monday, 12 July 2004 18:17:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:50 UTC