- From: Steve K Speicher <sspeiche@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:41:22 -0500
- To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>
- Cc: public-cdf@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
Al and all, I have responsed inline to your responses. Please let us know within two weeks whether you agree/disagree with our course of action. Thanks, Steve Speicher On behalf of the CDF WG Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org> wrote on 02/11/2007 08:49:06 PM: > At 8:53 AM -0500 11 02 2007, Steve K Speicher wrote: > Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org> wrote on 01/19/2007 01:58:18 PM: > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-CDR-20061122/ > > Compound Document by Reference Framework 1.0 > > > > Section 1.2 > > Related Documents: It would be nice to add "Web Integration > > Compound Document" at least once when using the acronym "WICD". > > Change made > > Thanks. > > > Section 1.3 > > Have an example of an alternative to the MathML and how the user > > would be choose between alternatives > > It is unclear what you meant by alternatives? We're assuming this comment > was intended to address the issue when a User Agent doesn't have a > supported mechanism for processing MathML markup. Since this first work > package only deals with compound documents by reference, we rely on the > fallback mechanisms provided by the host language, in this case XHTML. It > is in our requirements for our second work package to address processing > rules for handling of unknown content when host language doesn't have one. > Note too that this section is intended to be informative on compound > documents in general to give some background. > > > Section 2.1 > > Document Object Model. Quote: "CSS property inheritance is > > inhibited at inclusion boundaries." Could this be an accessibility > > problem when users have their user-defined CSS? > > This statement is just documenting how this is implemented in today. *This > does not affect user-defined CSS.* [emplasis added] It is possible > for content to be > developed that can copy these properties utilizing the child-to-parent DOM > access that has been outlined in this draft. > > See also the response from Anne at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cdf/2007Jan/0009.html > > I suppose that the question here is "does it work?" > > That is properly a CR question, not necessarily a Last Call Question. > > Is there anything in the planned test suite to test the application of User > stylesheets configured in the Browser to CDR sub-documents? Nothing specific to User stylesheets. We do plan to test parent-to-child and child-to-parent DOM access, which should generically cover having the content author directly control which CSS properties get propagated. We will not test user-defined stylesheets as we don't have a conformance statement for it. We have conformance statements for prerequiste CSS, which their testsuite should cover. No change is planned as a response to this comment. > > Add Section > > Describe keyboard navigation between compound documents by inclusion > > or reference and the ability to give interactive elements keyboard > > focus through ARIA techniques. > > The CDR Framework document is intended to handle basic framework issues, > while WICD Core and the other specifications address user interaction and > navigation models. We do not address CDI in these drafts, as this is > intended to be addressed in our next work package. No change will be made > to the framework document for this comment. The similar comment and > response [1] made for WICD Core will address this in a WICD context. > > > Definitions. > > "Focus traversal" is a defined term, but nothing > > in the document addresses this topic. CDR should state that any profile > > conforming to CDR shall define how focus traversal is handled, and how > the > > authors of parent and child documents can define navigation schemes. > > Instead of repeating the same definitions between documents, the WG > decided to put all CDF definitions into the CDRF and reference to this > section. So the WICD Core section 6.3 Focus Navigation [1] uses this > term. WICD core defines focus navigation profile requirements. As you > see with WICD mobile profile, it defines the focus navigation schemes > used. > > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cdf/2007Feb/0000.html > [2] > http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/Group/specs/CDR/wp1/wicd.xml#focus-navigation > > It will be worth-while to walk through the treatment of navigation in some > more detail tomorrow on the call. Since your original comment had to do with a "glossary" item and not navigation algorithms and accessibility, I assume that you agree with my response to the framework comment. We plan to make no changes in response to this comment.
Received on Monday, 19 February 2007 15:39:55 UTC