Re: keybind and softkeytype [Fwd: Requests to HTML4.0 draft]
Jordan Reiter (jreiter@mail.slc.edu)
Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:49:17 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:49:17 -0400
Message-Id: <l03110700b022910a1641@[198.77.183.201]>
In-Reply-To:
To: Scott Isaacs <scotti@microsoft.com>, www-html@w3.org,
"'Wayne Campbell'" <twaynec@pacbell.net>
From: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>
Subject: RE: keybind and softkeytype [Fwd: Requests to HTML4.0 draft]
At 6:56 PM -0000 8/21/97, Scott Isaacs wrote:
>I am very concerned that we are considering adding and changing
>attributes in HTML 4.0 at this late date. My assumption is that the spec
>was basically closed and we are doing is finalizing and clarifying the
>specification. I would prefer that if keybind and accesskey are
>syntactically the same, but we retain the accesskey property that was
>spec'ed and accepted a very long time ago. There are a large number of
>tools (not Microsoft) that have already implemented the accessKey and
>there are shipping implementations and therefore pages on the web using
>it.
>
>For softkeytype, I would prefer that we address it post HTML 4.0 in a
>separate working draft. (same holds true if keybind turns out to be
>different)
>
I agree. Frankly, I don't see why either of these *have* to be in the
specs. Companies use proprietary extensions all the time. Netscape, for
example, has a MULTICOL element which isn't in the HTML 4.0 specs. So
what? If they're that insistent that it be part of some sort of recognized
standardized do-hickey, then they can just wait until XML is widely
implemented. I think that special elements/attributes for different
interfaces shouldn't be required to put into the specs, and that XML
probably covers this.
--------------------------------------------------------
[ Jordan Reiter ]
[ mailto:jreiter@mail.slc.edu ]
[ "You can't just say, 'I don't want to get involved.' ]
[ The universe got you involved." --Hal Lipset, P.I. ]
--------------------------------------------------------