W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > June 2005

Re: Comment - 25. XHTML Role Access Module

From: Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 14:13:56 +0300
Message-ID: <42A58174.6020206@peda.net>
CC: www-html@w3.org, www-html-editor@w3.org

John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote:
> Allowing page authors to map explicit keystrokes to elements will render the
> access element as useless and flawed as the current accesskey attribute.
> [...]
> 
> Please, please, please.  Remove the "key" attribute of this new element and
> consider returning to the concept of allowing the end user/user agent to map
> the user's preferred keystroke combination to roles (pre-defined or other).

+1

There isn't enough accelerator keys available that are unused in 
every browser. Firefox, MSIE or Opera already reserve almost every 
ALT+anything combination by default. Alt+1 to Alt+9 are used by 
firefox to directly change to another tab so I cannot use those 
either as a page author.

All unused key ALT-combinations available after testing Firefox, 
Konqueror, MSIE with Finnish localization and Opera:

Alt+q
Alt+r
Alt+y
Alt+u
Alt+i
Alt+x
Alt+c
Alt+0

(And at least Alt+q, Alt+r, Alt+c and Alt+x are used by Unix version 
of Netscape Navigator so don't give any written instructions on the 
page for these combinations in any case.)

*Every* other key combination was already taken by at least one 
browser. I'm sure that other people can find user agents that use 
ALT for access key combinator and use the remaining "safe" letters. 
A non-alphanumeric key cannot be safely used for an access key 
because international keyboard layouts may not have those easily 
accessible.

That makes grand total of 8 free accelerator keys in the most common 
case available to content authors. Which one of those would you bind 
to "search" function (an example of a function that the user might 
want to use repeatedly) and expect some other author to decide to 
use the *same* letter? Remember that S is already taken.

I think 'role' or 'accesstarget' attribute giving a name for the 
access point would make much more sense. There's even a remote 
change that two random authors might select "search" for the 
function 'role' name by accident even when there weren't any list of 
defined roles available.

-- 
Mikko
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 11:14:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:19:03 UTC