W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > July 2002

Re: [48 hour] DRAFT Last Call comment Re: [XML 1.1] Allowable element names

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 19:43:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@topologi.com>
cc: WAI Cross-group list <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0207051936200.3025-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Rick Jelliffe wrote:

>From: "Al Gilman" <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
>
>> * "odd characters may make inaccessible names"

RJ:
>Good
>
CMN But not universally the case - there is some sentiment that certain "odd"
characters etc will be helpful.

>> *  "good-symbols BCP at dialect level"
>
>Good
>
>> *  "no clear cut."
>
>Yes, I wouldn't expect the WAI group to be deciding individual cases.
>Indeed, it is rather to the point that there can be considerable impediments
>to even getting as far as examining them!
>
>What I would hope is even the people on the XML Core WG who really
>would prefer that all characters be allowed in names will say "well,
>given the robustness aspect and the WAI aspect and the Unicode
>identifier guidelines and XML 1.0 history and user's expectation that
>readability be promoted, all things considered we should err on the
>side of being overly restrictive rather than being overly open."
>
>Naming-rules is one of these tricky things IMHO, where there is a combination
>of factors that some may consider minor in themselves (if you know
>what I mean) but which cumulative are more compelling.
>
>So "no clear cut" guidelines should be carefully distinguished from
>"no action required"!    I would suggest that there is an WAI advantage
>if all programming/markup languages/environments standardize
>on supporting the Unicode guidelines for identifiers, which are
>very similar to XML 1.0 but are updated based on character
>properties.  So "no clear cut" would be better as "no clear cut
>specific guidelines, but commending the Unicode identifier rules to
>the XML Core WG"

CMN But that isn't a position the group has agreed on. A thumbs-up character
or a smiley face is readable to a lot more people than using a non-zero
integer or the keyword "true", although it does present problems that require
resolution. But the argument is that absolute restrictions on names in XML
1.1 will not be the best outcome for accessibility.

cheers

Chaals
Received on Friday, 5 July 2002 19:44:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 13:15:37 GMT