W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Dropping nav-* properties?

From: Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:29:45 +0100
To: "Masahito Kawamori" <kawamori.masahito@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.wyh9vvhr6ugkrk@giuseppep-x220>
On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 06:52:38 +0100, Masahito Kawamori  
<kawamori.masahito@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:

>
> Giuseppe
>
> I suspect there may be some confusion about the semantics of nav-*  
> properties.  Do you think we can clarify this and >talk with the  
> accessibility people, where there is some objections to the use of  
> nav-index.

As mentioned below, I do not have problems with the spec dropping  
tab-index. My question is about the other nav-* properties. Their semantic  
seems pretty straightforward, at least in the form commonly used. So if  
there isn't any issue with those, they should be kept in IMO.

/g


>
> What do you think?
>
> Cheers
>
> Kawamori
>
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> while my request below for feedback and clarification went unanswered,  
>> I see that the group went ahead and decided >to drop the nav-*  
>> properties [1].
>>
>> AFAIK all the issues mentioned in the various threads are about  
>> nav-index. But as result all nav-* properties were >dropped. Can you  
>> help me understand why? Are there any issues specific of the  
>> nav-up/down/left/right? If so, could you >point me to that?
>>
>> As mentioned before, the nav-up/down/left/right (but NOT nav-index)  
>> properties are currently actively used in the TV >space, and referenced  
>> by public standards based on Web Standards. Note also that:
>>
>> 1. they are used as a way to handle navigation done with a standard  
>> remote control (so not keyboard tab navigation)
>> 2. they are implemented in TVs using Webkit as well as Opera/Presto  
>> based TVs.
>>
>> Would be good to understand if there is any part of the spec that is  
>> NOT broken and can be kept in, to avoid forcing >other groups to have  
>> to reference an old CSS drafts  (practice that W3C usually try to  
>> discourage)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Apr/0428.html
>>
>> /g
>>
>> On Mon, 08 Apr 2013 11:17:12 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale  
>> <giuseppep@opera.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tantek,
>>> I've just read your mail exchange with my colleague Mike [1][2][3] and  
>>> I wanted to add few comments on that thread >as well as extend the  
>>> discussion to the Web&TV IG, as there could be other people that may  
>>> have an opinion on this >subject.
>>>
>>> In short, the CSS Basic UI spec [4] mark nav-* properties as at risk,  
>>> and you seem to agree they should be dropped.
>>>
>>> As already mentioned by Mike in [1] and [3] , we (Opera) do recommend  
>>> use of nav-* properties for our TV store >Apps, and AFAIK so far we  
>>> haven't received any complaint (this doesn't mean there are no issues  
>>> of course, but at >least we haven't heard of any)
>>>
>>> Furthermore, as also mentioned by Mike, there are other specifications  
>>> referencing CSS nav-* properties, namely >HbbTV [5].
>>>
>>> The HbbTV specification, although not aimed to the "Open Web", it's  
>>> still a public specification and is currently >supported in Europe by  
>>> many retail devices (mostly TVs and STBs), not only Opera based but  
>>> also Webkit based
>>>
>>> Also in this case, I haven't heard (so far) any complaint from (Hbb)TV  
>>> apps developers.
>>>
>>> Given the pointers above, can you help me (us) understand what is the  
>>> problem with css nav-* properties and why you >want to drop them? As  
>>> they seem to be used and supported by different browsers, would be  
>>> possible to investigate more >in details what is working (and what is  
>>> not) and maybe drop only the problematic parts (if any)?
>>>
>>> I appreciate you may have debated this at length before on the  
>>> www-style list, but I was wondering if for the >benefit of the web&tv  
>>> folks you could summarize the issues and provide related pointers.
>>>
>>> Also note that personally I haven't done an in depth analysis of the  
>>> spec and/or the implementations out there, but >I wanted to get this  
>>> discussion started ASAP as the deadline for comments is already passed.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Feb/0027.html
>>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Feb/0036.html
>>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013Feb/0037.html
>>> [4] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-ui/
>>> [5] http://hbbtv.org/pages/about_hbbtv/specification.php
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Giuseppe Pascale
>> Product Manager TV & Connected Devices
>> Opera Software
>>
>>



-- 
Giuseppe Pascale
Product Manager TV & Connected Devices
Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 08:30:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:12 UTC