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

Re: [last call, S2] viewport vs. point of regard confusion in 7.5

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 11:30:16 -0500
Message-ID: <3A101718.2E74961D@w3.org>
To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Al Gilman wrote:
> [checkpoint 7.5 where it says]
>    7.5 Allow the user to search forward through [427]text content that
>           has been [428]rendered. The search must encompass all text
>           within the viewport, both inside and outside the [429]point of
>           regard. Allow the user to start a search from any selected or
>           focused location in content. When there is a match, allow the
>           user to search for the next instance of the text from the
>           location of the match. When there is a match, move the
>           [430]point of regard so that the matched text is in the
>           viewport. Alert the user when there is no match. [...]
> The use of 'viewport' in the early and later portions of this quote would seem
> to be inconsistent.  In the first case, the viewport would appear to comprise
> the whole canvas which is stretched out behind (including beyond the bounds
> of)
> the presently display within e.g. a scroll region.  However, the latter "move
> so that the matched text is in _the viewport_ suggest the reverse, that the
> viewport is what was called the _point of regard_ in the earlier sentence.

Yes, I think you are right. We had trouble expressing the fact that the
user needed to have access to all content, whether currently in the
viewport or not. I believe this is an editorial bug.

 _ Ian

> --
> Usage in headers.  Comments in response to the last call request for comments
> have been classified S1, S2, or E based on the following rough scale:
> S1: Substantive matter of the first (highest) criticality or importance to the
> mission of the document.  The standard set is ineffective, the document is
> self
> contradictory, etc.
> S2: Substantive matter of a somewhat lower criticality.  The document is hard
> to comprehend, does not align well with related WAI documents, etc.
> E: Editorial matters.  Not regarded as substantive.
> Re:
> User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0
> W3C Working Draft 23 October 2000
>    This version:
> [9]<http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-20001023>http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/W
> D-UAAG10-20001023

Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 13 November 2000 11:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:28 UTC