Re: Thank you for the discussion on keybind/softkeytype

Wayne Campbell (twaynec@pacbell.net)
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:41:40 -0800


Message-Id: <l03110701b02765f7fb05@[206.170.217.6]>
In-Reply-To: <01BCB159.686B4F00@tomy.access.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 08:41:40 -0800
To: Tomy Kamada <tomy@access.co.jp>, "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
From: Wayne Campbell <twaynec@pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Thank you for the discussion on keybind/softkeytype

Tomy:

Sorry about that. forgot to specify send-to-all the first time. This never
made it to the list :(

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

Nothing to be sorry about, IMO. That's how standards develop, as far as I
know. :)

>(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.

I tnink I see what you are saying. So keybind, although similar, will have
distinct differences over and above accesskey.

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

I think there shouldn't be a problem with this, but I'm in no "official"
capacity, so this is just my opinion.

>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.

I think that you are contriibuting already, just being involved in this
discussion. :)

Now, for those more knowledgable than I about the standards process, just
when is a draft closed? The draft released on 08 Jul 1997 (and I haven't
seen a newer release yet) states that, as a draft, it is under constant
revision and is therefore subject to change without notice. I also have yet
to see any "official" notice that the draft is closed to revision. Under
those auspices, I would think that adding a new attribute or two wouldn't
be a problem at this stage of the game.

Have I missed some official notification of the draft being closed to revision?

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/