Thank you for the discussion on keybind/softkeytype

Tomy Kamada (tomy@access.co.jp)
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:18:40 +0900


Message-Id: <01BCB159.686B4F00@tomy.access.co.jp>
From: Tomy Kamada <tomy@access.co.jp>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:18:40 +0900
Subject: Thank you for the discussion on keybind/softkeytype

Thank you for the discussion.
I am sorry that I propose the new attributes at the
final process of defining HTML4.0.

(1) keybind/accesskey
As Wayne suggested, it would be possible to download
new software to the end-user products through the Internet.
(In the non-PC market, software version-up via network is not
yet common way, but will be accepted way in the near future.)
We plan to support both "accesskey" and "keybind".
The functionality is almost the same. I suggest the special
keys F1-F12 and others are useful in case of keyboard-less
devices such as Web Terminals and Internet-TVs/STBs.

(2) softkeytype
I would be very happy if this new attribute or similar one
is adopted in the next version of HTML4.0.

---
We are mainly working for non-PC consumer devices enabling the
Internet access. I would be very happy if we can contribute 
something to W3C HTML activities.

Thanks.

				--- tomy
-----------------------------------
Dr Tomihisa Kamada
Executive Vice-President, R&D
ACCESS CO.,LTD.
Hirata-Bld. 8F, 2-8-16 Sarugaku-cho
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 101 JAPAN
TEL +81-3-5259-3535
FAX +81-3-5259-3536

----------
From: 	Wayne Campbell
Sent: 	Saturday, August 23, 1997 4:50 AM
To: 	www-html@w3.org
Subject: 	RE: keybind and softkeytype [Fwd: Requests to HTML4.0 draft]

At 12:49 AM -0400 8/22/97, Jordan Reiter wrote:
>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.

Well, I never really said that I was in favor of adding them to the spec,
with the exception of the softkeytype attribute, and even then I don't
think it has to be the current draft.

As a matter of fact, I think it would be easier (in the case of the
accesskey/keybind attribute and if both function the same) to have the
manufactuerer of the devices simply issue an update to their software that
modifies the software to use accesskey instead of keybind, and make the
update available to the end-user via the web (and ftp).

my .02

Wayne

               Nick: TWayne or Wayne or WayneC
              Email: mailto:twaynec@pacbell.net
          Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/6088/
VU Study Group Site: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/8231/