W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2005

Re: SVG12: nav-* properties

From: Jon Ferraiolo <jon.ferraiolo@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 13:10:07 -0700
To: Dean Jackson <dino@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: Ola Andersson <Ola.Andersson@ikivo.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-id: <6.1.1.1.2.20050523125544.041049b0@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com>

Hi Dean and Bjoern,
I agree with your responses. As I remember, the SVG WG didn't really care 
very much about the markup used for navigation options. There is a good 
chance that if there is consensus feedback from the W3C community, then the 
SVG WG will go along with that consensus without resistance.

In terms of why the SVG-t 1.2 LC uses directional navigation syntax that is 
different than CSS3, I believe there were two markup approaches already in 
W3C specs: the CSS3 UI markup (nav-* properties) and the XHTML2 markup 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-hyperAttributes.html#s_hyperAttributesmodule). 
The XHTML2 markup included a processing model description which looked like 
a good foundation from which to build and offered some minor 
simplifications versus the CSS3 appraoch. I am not sure, but I believe that 
the SVG WG decided it preferred the XHTML2 approach and subsequently 
decided to build its 8-way directional navigation facilities to integrate 
well with nextfocus/prevfocus. In other words, the first-order decision was 
whether to use CSS3 syntax ('nav-index') or XHTML2 syntax 
(nextfocus/prevfocus) for "tab navigation", and then the second-order 
decision is whether to make directional navigation syntax compatible with 
the chosen "tab navigation" syntax.

Jon

At 08:08 AM 5/23/2005, Dean Jackson wrote:


>On 23/05/2005, at 7:14 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:
>
>>
>>* Ola Andersson wrote:
>>
>>>>  In http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20050413/ svgudom.html the
>>>>definition of the moveFocus operations refers to nav-*
>>>>properties, no
>>>>such properties are defined in the draft, please change the draft
>>>>such
>>>>that it refers to something it actually defines.
>>
>>
>>>nav-* properties have been replaced by focus*.
>>
>>This does not satisfy me. I think rather than inventing new mechanisms
>>the SVG Working Group should coordinate with the CSS WG to satisfy the
>>dependencies noted in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/svg-charter and if
>>that
>>fails, note that in the Last Call Announcement as required by the
>>Process document.
>
>We replaced nav-* with focus* after feedback from the WAI
>domain.
>
>Personally, I'm ok with either solution. However, we need
>8-way navigation, not 4-way as CSS3-UI provides. Assuming that
>CSS WG would accept an enhancement to this feature then I
>think nav-* is acceptable. What do you think?
>
>You don't really need to answer the following questions. In
>fact I'd prefer it if you didn't :) I'm much more interested
>in your feedback on the proposal.
>
>>Could you please point me to the SVG WG comment on css3-ui on why the
>>reference had to be removed from SVG 1.2?
>
>Sorry, I don't understand. You think that in order to remove a
>reference to a specification we were not using we have to
>send a comment on that specification?
>
>>Are there positive review
>>comments from the CDF Working Group that they support conflicting
>>navigation order mechanisms in e.g. a XHTML+SVG document type?
>
>Do you mean positive review comments on SVG Tiny, or just
>positive comments in general?
>
>
>>Does
>>SVG 1.2 "Full" still use the nav-* properties?
>
>No.
>
>>If so, how are conflicts
>>resolved between the two mechanisms?
>
>No conflicts.
>
>Dean
>
>
Received on Monday, 23 May 2005 20:21:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:30 GMT