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

RE: Proposal to reconsider resolution to issue 420

From: Hansen, Eric <ehansen@ets.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 16:00:01 -0500
To: "'Ian Jacobs'" <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Message-id: <B49B36B1086DD41187DC000077893CFB8B4661@rosnt46.ets.org>
Seems reasonable...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org]
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:14 PM
> To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
> Subject: Proposal to reconsider resolution to issue 420
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> At the 20 December teleconference [1], we resolved for issue 420 [2]
> not to make any change to checkpoint 8.3 regarding prompting before
> following a fee link. This is a request to reconsider that decision.
> 
> In the 23 October draft [3], the checkpoint reads:
> 
>   8.3 Render in a distinct style those links that have been 
>       marked up to indicate that following them will involve a 
>       fee and allow the user to configure this style. 
>       For graphical viewports, offer at least three
>       rendering options, including colors and fonts.
>       Allow the user to select from among the range of system
>       colors and fonts.
> 
> Here's why I think the decision should be reconsidered:
> 
>  - We argued that since this is not a pervasive problem 
>    today on the Web in terms of *user agent responsibilities*, 
>    it was not urgent to address with a prompting requirement 
>    in UAAG 1.0. 
> 
>  - However, this is done today using plug-ins. In fact,
>    the 25 August 1999 Micropayments Working Draft [4] states:
> 
>     <BLOCKQUOTE>
>     For current browsers, embedding information in HTML 
>     pages MUST be done using a Per Fee Link Handler, which
>     MUST  be a plug-in or JAVA Applet.
>     </BLOCKQUOTE>
> 
>  - 8.3 and 8.X (proposed below) don't apply for formats 
>    that don't allow authors to mark up fee links.
>    "Fee link" is a role of content that cannot be recognized 
>    in HTML, for example. Thus, 8.3 and 8.x do not impose
>    additional burdens on existing browsers.
> 
>  - If feel links are not used widely today, and browsers
>    don't yet implement these features, we should be ahead of
>    the curve and ensure that we require them to do the
>    right thing now. I recognize that we need implementation 
>    experience to see whetherexisting plug-ins allow 
>    configuration to prompt users before charging them.
>  
>  - It is always possible to claim conformance with the
>    addition of a plug-in that supports fee links.
> 
> Thus, after reflection, I support the reviewer's 
> suggestion (which the WG agreed was a good idea) and 
> believe that:
> 
>  1) It's a P2 requirement to prevent activation of a link
>     that may involve a fee.
> 
>  2) It's a P3 requirement to inform the user through style
>     that following a link may involve a fee.
> 
> Therefore I propose:
> 
>  1) Changing 8.3 to a P3 checkpoint.
> 
>  2) Adding the following P2 checkpoint:
> 
>   8.X Allow configuration so the user is prompted to confirm
>       the activation of any link that has been marked up to
>       indicate that following it will involve a fee.
> 
> Comments:
> 
>  a) Checkpoint 8.5 already allows the user to query links for
>     information about fees.
>  
>  - Ian
> 
> [1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000OctDec/0430.html
[2] http://server.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear-lc2.html#420
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-UAAG10-20001023/
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-Micropayment-Markup-19990825 
-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 16:00:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:22 GMT