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

Re: access to "background sound" objects (issue 297)

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:37:08 -0400
Message-Id: <200007251434.KAA2194852@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
At 08:28 AM 2000-07-25 -0500, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>Just so I have this straight.
>1. Is the discussion trying to determine if proprietary elements like 
><BGSOUND> is considered decorative or style rather than content?

Actually, it is trying to determine if sounds that work like this need to
offer the user the full range of controls identified for a soundtrack, or
if the option to turn it off suffices.

One posible rationale for why "just turning it off" might be considered
sufficient is that the sound is presumptively decorative.  A sub-argument
on this hypothesis it to try to "determine if said elements should be
considered decorative etc."

You raise the possibility of another possible argument -- that we don't
want to lay a lot of requirements against the implementation of stuff that
isn't in the W3C specification to begin with.

>2. Is there any other markup the user agent can recognize that can produce 
>a background sound (other than use of scripting techniques)?

I don't know if <EMBED> counts as "any other markup" because it does match
"proprietary elements like <BGSOUND>."  But I believe that this is another
way to insert a sound with a similar effect.

Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2000 10:31:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:27 UTC