- From: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:18:59 -0400
- To: tink@tink.uk, Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Cc: ARIA <public-aria@w3.org>
I appreciate the efforts to move the spec along, and also the need for review timelines. There is an "at risk" statement in the upcoming Candidate Recommendation around this normative dependency, which would make it non-normative and change a "must" to a "should" if the spec does not advance in time for ARIA. We have a few months before we need to decide whether to implement the risk condition. So for now, let's let things sail along and see where we end up. Michael On 26/10/2016 9:55 AM, Léonie Watson wrote: > Rich, > > We've put both UI Events Keyboard Events Key Values and UI Events > Keyboard Events Code Values out for wide review. > > We have asked for feedback within one month. The i18n people have > replied to say they plan to request several substantive changes to the > Key Values spec, and will need more time to do this. > > Unfortunately this pushes any possibility of moving Key Values into CR > to an unknown point in time. > > The i18n people also noted that they had not been asked for wide > review on ARIA 1.1, and suggested that this would be good - especially > since ARIA references the UI Events specs. > > > Léonie. > @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem > > On 19/10/2016 17:20, Rich Schwerdtfeger wrote: >> Hi Michael, >> >> I spoke with Leonie and she is working on the timeline for us with the >> editors of the spec. Would you please provide me with the updated >> timeline that was sent to PLH here so that Leonie can see it? >> >> Thanks, >> Rich >> Rich Schwerdtfeger >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 18, 2016, at 6:35 PM, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org >>> <mailto:cooper@w3.org>> wrote: >>> >>> The ARIA 1.1 aria-keyshortcuts property: >>> >>> https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-keyshortcuts >>> >>> has a normative reference to UI Events KeyboardEvent key Values. That >>> document, however, is just a Working Draft. It is not permitted for a >>> specification to advance to Recommendation while normative >>> dependencies exist on specifications that have not themselves yet >>> advanced to Recommendation. Do we expect this spec will reach >>> Recommendation by the time we want ARIA to (April 2017)? If not we >>> have a problem. >>> >>> The quickest fix I can think of is to change the "must" to a "should" >>> in the reference to that spec, in the sentence "Authors /MUST/ specify >>> modifier keys exactly according to...". But that's a substantive >>> change, that we would have to agree quickly because the formal >>> transition to CR is scheduled for next week. >>> >>> Michael >>> >>
Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2016 14:19:03 UTC