W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: error in Tech example of target att

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:52:48 -0500
Message-Id: <200002292252.RAA1297720@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Cc: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
At 04:19 PM 2000-02-29 -0600, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>Nir,
>Thanks for comments.
>In general the guidelines do not tell developers not to do something.  What
>we do say is that they should conform to open standards that are accessible
>like the ones available from the W3C and then in the Web Content Guidelines
>for authors to use correct markup.  If a user agent wants to extend the
>functionality through some proprietary markup, we don't say not to do it.

AG::

I have to admit I am torn on this one.  As I read it, Nir is not asking the
UA techniques to forbid the function of _new but rather since _blank
triggers the same function (or does it?) then the examples in the
Techniques document should follow the WCAG principle "if there is a W3C
reccommended way to deliver this functionality, use it."  

Opening a new window for target="_blank" is standard functionality.
Requesting a new window by target="_new" violates the W3C recommendation
for the format.  HTML 4.0.1 still says "user agents should ignore frame
targets [not defined in the spec or starting with letters, i.e. valid name
tokens]."

I think that we need to lodge this as a trouble report against HTML 4.0.1,
because it calls for a "new, unnamed" window for content targeted to
_blank.  This is bad access practice.  We need all windows to be titled,
even if the chrome style suppresses the title.  Better the format should
recognize _new at title the frame.  [Or some such.  The present situation
is that the HTML spec does not cover the consensus commercial usage and the
HTML spec asks for behavior which is bad for access, to the extent of the
chrome-free new window.

The heuristic value of target="_new" in the example is better than of
_blank in the same application.  So there is a net EO loss to use squeaky
clean HTML in the example.  But still...

Al

>This could lead to a long list of items that would be beyond the capability
>of the working group to manage.
>
>Jon
>
>
>At 03:50 PM 2/29/00 -0500, Nir Dagan wrote:
>>In http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-TECHS-20000128/
>>article 4.16: 
>>there is an (implicit HTML) markup example of <a target="_new"> 
>>
>>To make a long story short, replacing "_new" 
>>with "_blank" in the example, would be a good change.
>>
>>To keep a long story long:
>>In HTML the value of target must begin with a letter [a-zA-Z]
>>unless it is a reserved name starting with an underscore. "_new" 
>>is not one of these reserved names.
>>See: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-frame-target
>>where it says:
>>"6.16 Frame target names
>>Except for the reserved names listed below, frame target names 
>>(%FrameTarget; in the DTD) must begin with an alphabetic 
>>character (a-zA-Z). User agents should ignore all other 
>>target names."
>>
>>Regards,
>>Nir.
>>===================================
>>Nir Dagan
>>Assistant Professor of Economics
>>Brown University 
>>Providence, RI
>>USA
>>
>>http://www.nirdagan.com
>>mailto:nir@nirdagan.com
>>tel:+1-401-863-2145
>
>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
>Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
>College of Applied Life Studies
>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
>1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL  61820
>
>Voice: (217) 244-5870
>Fax: (217) 333-0248
>
>E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
>
>WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
> 
Received on Tuesday, 29 February 2000 17:51:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:49:52 GMT