- From: Ian Hickson <ianh@netscape.com>
- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:09:42 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
- To: Sean Palmer <wapdesign@wapdesign.org.uk>
- cc: Robin Berjon <robin@knowscape.com>, www-style@w3.org
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, Sean Palmer wrote:
> > > > That's why you should put the navigation bar:
> > > > 1. in structural markup (not a table)
> > > > 2. at the bottom of the file
> > >Been there - doesn't work.
> > Besides, accessibility will only happen if there's an easy way for the
> > average webmaster to make it happen, and a simple CSS line would make it
> > much easier than either of your points.
>
> Exactly.
>
> .navbar { play: optional; skip: true; }
>
> Simplicity itself. And when it is applied, visually you could have:-
> [home] [mail] [back] ...
> to:
> [skip] [home] [mail] [back] ...
> Or whatever, based on a UA's built in style processor;
>
> And aurally: "Now follows another stupid navigation bar that you've heard a
> million times before. To skip this bar, please holler 'aaargh!' now."
How is this different from an XSLT stylesheet that introduces a link that
points to the next element?
e.g., an XSLT stylesheet that takes:
...
<div class="navbar">
....
</div>
<h2 id="start">
...
...and turns it into:
...
<div class="navbar">
<a href="#start">[skip navigation bar]</a>
....
</div>
<h2 id="start">
...
If there _is_ no difference, then the answer is "you can already do it".
> Maybe better:
> .navbar { play: optional; allow-skip: true; alt: uri(#intro); }
This is getting confusing. Could you define what 'play', 'optional',
'allow-skip', 'true', 'alt' and 'alt''s value all mean?
--
Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
+1 650 937 6593 `- , ) - > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
Received on Saturday, 14 October 2000 10:11:24 UTC