W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Summing up the debate about validity at Priority 1 or 2

From: Ineke van der Maat <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 16:12:53 +0200
Message-ID: <021001c577fd$a59d2e20$0201a8c0@inekem>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Hello patrick,

You wrote:
>That last part made me chuckle. Accessible as nothing ever before,
> provided you run on Windows and use IE, more than likely...

Be sure: you are  not the only one!  But  perhaps is meant: more accessible
as Windows was before? But also then is the question of AT can handle it
easily and is it conform to wcag 1.0/2.0  Seeing how styles are declared in
the code, I
don't dare to believe it

Information about the  accessibility  issues is here:
http://winfx.msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-
us/wcp_conceptual/winfx/port_task_accessibility.asp

I found out how to create Accesskeys for a menu
<Menu>
      <MenuItem>
        <MenuItem.Header>
        <TextBlock><AccessKey>P</AccessKey>roject</TextBlock>
        </MenuItem.Header>
          <MenuItem>
            <MenuItem.Header>
              <TextBlock><AccessKey>A</AccessKey>dd</TextBlock>
            </MenuItem.Header>
          </MenuItem>
          <MenuItem>
            <MenuItem.Header>
              <TextBlock><AccessKey>D</AccessKey>elete</TextBlock>
            </MenuItem.Header>
          </MenuItem>
  <MenuItem Mode="Separator"/>
      <MenuItem Header="Recent Files"/>
     </MenuItem>
 </Menu>


Does Microsoft have shares in the wasting energy industrie: what a
superfluous code compared to how it is done now?


Greetings
Ineke van der Maat
Received on Thursday, 23 June 2005 14:12:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:21 GMT