- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 09:09:24 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 09/02/2017 08:51, lisa.seeman wrote: > The point of the extension is it is a freely available download and the > author does not have to include the script themselves. If I was an > author I would use the include becuse then the author maintains control. > However I do not think people felt that was interoperable enough and it > has to also ne a free download. I think it's also not realistic to expect all authors of all web content out in the wild to start adding specific customisation code to all their sites - that is one of the concerns. It's a much bigger ask than for authors to add new, solidly specified and standardised, and UA supported attributes in markup. So realistically, the extension route is probably the one that should be explored further. Worth exploring if the extension script can also make sense (and to what degree) of existing and well-established markup elements and attributes - for instance, if a page uses the <aside> element, or has elements with a role="complementary", treat those as non-essential, and have the extension hide these as non-essential. This way, the extension would become immediately useful on sites that use modern markup, even if authors haven't added any new proposed attributes. P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2017 09:09:45 UTC