W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: SVG1.1 New Accessibility Guidelines? & keyboard

From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:04:03 +0100
To: (wrong string) ‚‚ŠŒ†”–„—Ÿ€‚" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200801192104.03411.Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>

> Olaf,
>
> regarding my test,  or http://olaf.kilu.de/svgtest/beginkey01.svg
> they don't wfm with Opera 9.5 on OS X, please confirm what key
> strokes and which system it works for you...

Ok - you already found it yourself - but would have been no
surprise, if the key combinations would have depended on the
operating system ;o) 


>
> with http://peepo.co.uk/temp/accumulate.svg
> did you try what happens if you wait 5 seconds, view animation, then
> click on box?

Yes, I played around with it with several combinations. I still think,
the behaviour of Opera 9.50 beta is correct here. Such animations, if
restarted, cannot build on a previous run of the same animation
element.
It cumulates only in the same run or is additive relative to the
static underlying value and other animations - new begin instance - 
new luck, completely starting from the beginning, forget
about previous begin instances for the same animation element.


> there's obviously a wide range of possible different mutations if one
> also includes accessKey and even more UA results.

No - I think this sample has a well defined behaviour, which can be
derived from SMIL completely.


> but is there a clear means to distinguish what is specified and what
> is a bug.
>
> I guess not, but...

Yes, but not completely trivial to find and to grap together in 
SMIL (and the old SMIL animation recommendations contains
several minor bugs, inconsistencies and curious samples, 
therefore sometimes one has to derive the correct
interpretation already reading SMIL2/3 to understand the
old SMIL animation recommendation still relevant for 
SVG 1.1 ;o) Anyway, I think, for your example there are
no general problems in the specifications, this is more
a problem to understand, how begin and end time
lists work and about understanding accumulative
and additive behaviour.

And your sample contains already about four challenges
for implementors:
- by animation
- begin list value with mixed types
- accumuate
- accessKey

And if there is more than one bug for these four features
in the implementation it is not easy to understand anymore,
what currently happens in a wrong implementation.
Often with only one bug and a simple example one can
derive what exactly was implemented wrong or what 
the programmer did not understand or did not read, 
but with two or three bugs for one example it often
gets really hard to identify, what went wrong in detail.
Therefore I often use simple tests first to get familiar
with bugs for each feature. If they are fixed in an
implementation, I try to combine more features just
to see, if there might be more problems ;o)
Received on Saturday, 19 January 2008 20:08:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:38 GMT