W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: behavior reuse

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 09:07:15 +0100
Message-Id: <199812010807.JAA27612@www47.inria.fr>
To: "Charles (Chuck) Oppermann" <chuckop@microsoft.com>
cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org

Nothing precludes the aid to do a better job at Table linearization
when the UA does a poor job at it.

It's not a either/or UA/Aid situation, so I see no disadvantage for
the end-user in having the UA giving it a try in the first place.

Is there a down side ?
(like promoting poor linearization done by UA ?)

> I think you are misunderstanding my position.  We don't want tables
> linearized - we expose the structure of tables and allow accessibility aids
> to decide for themselves how to represent the table to the user.  The
> advantage is that each aid can optimize the presentation to their particular
> users.  The disadvantage is that the accessibility aid has to implement the
> feature.

> Finally, the user agent itself can unroll the table, using an internal
> script or other code or by merely changing the rules by which is displays
> tables.  The advantage of this method is that accessibility's aids have to
> do no work.  The disadvantage is that each user agent could do it
> differently and that the display is not optimized to a particular set of
> users.
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 1998 03:07:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:48:38 GMT