W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: Proposal for fixing checkpoints 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.7

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 10:52:10 -0500 (EST)
To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
cc: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0204041043130.31050-100000@tux.w3.org>
In general I agree with the proposal. However I have concerns about the
example provided of what to do in an image map.

HTML does specify the regions of the image which are active in the HTML
format, e.g.

  <area shape="rect" coords="0 0 5 5" alt="corner shop" />

I think it is reasonable to expect that a user agent which can lay out an
image and render a border on it, and which can interpret movement within that
image, highlights the relevant part.

(How does the group feel about claiming conformance based on the idea that
the status bar identifies the target of the currently focussed link?)


On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Ian B. Jacobs wrote:

  Dear UAWG,

  A few days ago, I sent an email [1] proposing some changes regarding
  our checkpoints relating to visual highlight of selection, focus,
  and a couple of other pieces of information. There's been a fair
  amount of discussion on the list, and I'd like to summarize some of
  the key points in preparation for discussion at tomorrow's

  After the summary, there is a proposal that Jon and I support.
  We welcome your comments.
[snipped summmary]
[snip proposed 10.x 1-4]
    5. Highlight enabled elements according to the granularity
      specified in the format. For example, an HTML user agent
      rendering a PNG image as part of an image map is only
      required to highlight the image as a whole, not each enabled
      region. An SVG user agent rendering an SVG image with
      embedded graphical links is required to highlight each
      graphical link that may be rendered independently according
      to the SVG specification.

[snipped the rest]
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2002 10:52:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:31 UTC