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

Configurable keyboard isn't my issue or idea!

From: Bryan Campbell <bryany@pathcom.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 16:34:08 -0500
Message-Id: <2.2.32.19981218213408.006ab33c@mail.pathcom.com>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org, askbill@microsoft.com
Cc: Jesse Berst <jesse@jesseberst.com>
Last week when reading Raw minutes of the 11 Dec 1999 meeting I was shocked
to see Charles Oppermann say <chuckop@microsoft.com> I want this Guildline
to call for configurable keyboard controls
http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/1998/12/wai-ua-f2f-19981211.html
It has taken me this long figure out how my simple point that 1 keystroke
browsing commands are a must for Web Accessibility became a complex point
about a configurable keyboard. After all there are some 1 keystroke commands
in Windows 9x & many in NCSA's Mosaic browser. While those in Opera receive
high praise: Bill Machrone <bill_machrone@zd.com> is vice president of
technology for Ziff-Davis
http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/opinion/0803/03mach.html &
http://www.oreilly.com/news/opera_0798.html Other press references exist,
but the Group shouldn't need to look further than this buyer observation on
http://www.macronet.com/~billmc/ Bill McMurray <billmcm@bigfoot.com> have
talked about the vital importance of 1 keystroke browsing commands. However,
Microsoft was concerned about OS consistancy so the 1 keystroke commands
couldn't just be there as in other programs, or even an easy On/Off option.
I've spent months trying to accommodate Microsoft's call for OS consistancy
via a configurable keyboard: It is Microsoft's issue because it refuse to
use any single layout as an *example* of what is necessary! Any 1 reasoned
layout for keystroke commands is *much* better than none, sigh.

Meanwhile my vital point has been pushed aside, as with table linearization
Microsoft shies away from real action: I expected to see much, much more of
its can-do approach & have been disappointed. I don't mind taking-on &
working around the Windows' interface everyday, but once my efforts to work
within it are cited as less necessary demands I'm outrage. Accessibility
exists as a topic because the Windows' interface doesn't work for everyone.
Microsoft should be embarrassed to have people with disabilities trying to
work around its requirement when it says it is here help.

From where I sit it seems Microsoft expects its Accessibility staff to make
people with physical disabilities blend into its interface: That isn't how
we deal with it. We mold the interface to be *able* to run it very well.
Still I've seen Microsoft marshal huge resources to get things done, I would
truly appreciate such vigor on Accessibility if it focused on getting the
job done, uncomplicated by other issues. I've just begun to find dealing
with the 2 contradictory goals of Accessibility & interface consistancy too
stressful so this is only a temporary resubscribe to note why a configurable
keyboard is a topic. If the list manages to get out from under the extra
burden please let know.


In case anyone wonders why my notes sometimes also go to Jesse Berst of ZD's
Anchordesk http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk
it is because he supports Web standards. When I wrote, over 2 years, to
thank him on that position he also instantly grasped the need for keyboard
browser & other controls so we occasionally discuss how the matter is going.

Regards,
Bryan

-> "I don't need to stand to talk, to advise, & to generally make a pain in
the ass out of myself." Dr. Stephen Franklin, "Babylon 5": 'Shadow Dancing'
Received on Friday, 18 December 1998 16:35:45 GMT

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