W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1999

RE: direct and spatial mapping to functionalities

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:55:07 -0400
Message-Id: <199910052009.QAA18282@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: "Denis Anson" <danson@miseri.edu>, <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
At 09:34 AM 10/5/99 -0400, Denis Anson wrote:
>I'd have to disagree with your contention that those who can type "a mile a
>minute" can use MouseKeys effectively.  Even the folks at Microsoft say that
>MouseKeys is a terrible mouse emulator.  It just is something that makes
>things possible.  It doesn't really make them functional.

OK, I stand corrected on that point.


>Denis Anson, MS, OTR
>Assistant Professor
>College Misericordia
>301 Lake St.
>Dallas, PA 18612
>Member since 1989:
>RESNA: An International Association of Assistive Techology Professionals
>Website: http://www.resna.org
>ORLANDO, FL, JUNE 28 -- July 2, 2000
>-----Original Message-----
>From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On Behalf
>Of Al Gilman
>Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 1999 9:14 AM
>To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
>Cc: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
>Subject: Re: direct and spatial mapping to functionalities
>At 02:10 AM 10/5/99 -0400, Marja-Riitta Koivunen wrote:
>>>2) Users need two types of access to user agent functionalities:
>>>   serial (with context) and direct (e.g., activated through the
>>>   keyboard, voice, or mouse). We don't have a checkpoint about
>>>   this, although I did include prose in the 4 October version of
>>>   the spec (in the intro) distinguishing types of access.
>>I don't undestand serial? I think we have spatial mapping with pointing and
>>direct mapping without pointing. And both are important. It is important
>>not to be be forced to point because some users have great difficulties
>>with this.
>a) Ian: 'serial' is not a good term here.  Think in terms of the intrapage
>navigation flavors: sequential, hierarchical, and direct.  What we are
>talking about is the same process-structure flavors to get to "an action in
>the UI or page has been commanded" as opposed to "a point in the page has
>been made the current [focus | point of regard]."  The classical GUI mode
>is somewhat hierarchical with verbs collected under menus.  One is not
>usually sequencing through all available verbs in the GUI to find one.  So
>'multistep' vs. 'direct' encoding of the comands is probably better
>terminology to communicate what is going on.  But we have the following
>_three_ axes mixed together in the discussion so far: keyboard vs. pointing
>device for selection and activation; spatial layout vs. named hierarchy for
>orientation to the range of verb options; flat command list vs.
>hierarchical menus (multistep dialog).
>b) Marja: You say some people have trouble with pointing.  I thought that
>one group that most wants a flat command list with many symbols but direct
>activation from the long list are those who have trouble completing any
>input action.  So they want to get to the bottom line with a minimum of
>steps.  There are other people who have problems with pointing devices but
>can type a mile a minute.  The latter group can use MouseKeys and the menus
>work fine, or use the keycodes for the hierarchical descent through the
>This leaves me thinking that the group that needs direct versions of
>commands the most is not "those that have trouble with pointing" but "those

>that have trouble performing any UI action, be it a keypress, mouse move,
>mouse click, etc.."
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 1999 15:55:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:24 UTC