Nested, yes, but we don't land back on the containing widget but rather on the next tab stop. So we keep popping the stack until we reach a tabable widget. Does that make sense. Did I mangle that somehow in the description? This was why I put in the example showing that after landing on widget D you would go to B, not back to A. Maybe I need to highlight that, if it's really what should happen. CB Dave Pawson wrote: > 2008/7/1 Chris Blouch <cblouch@aol.com>: > >> I was asked to write up a generalized statement as to how this should >> work as far as keyboard controls. >> >> CB >> >> ------- >> >> Clarification on widgets within widgets >> >> The general navigation model is for a user to tab to a widget, interact >> with the controls in that widget and then tab to move focus off to the >> next widget in the tab order. By extension, when the construct of a >> widget contains another widget, tab will move focus to the contained >> widget because it is the next item in the tab order. This continues down >> the layers of widgets until the last widget is reached. For example: We >> have two widgets A and B on a page. Widget A contains within it Widgets >> C and D. When tabbing, focus would land on Widget A but another tab >> would not go to Widget B. Instead it would focus on C and then D >> followed by B. >> > > > LIke operating on nested braces? > > ( ((( ))) ()()) > > What happens when you finish the most deeply nested ones? > back out to the last 'closure', then on to the next one? > > regards > > > > >Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 15:47:39 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:48:39 GMT