- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:03:01 +0000
- To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- CC: "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E3EACD022300B94D88613639CF4E25F80869F886@TK5EX14MBXC136.redmond.corp.microsoft.>
Should these issues be raised as Bugzilla bugs on the HTML5 spec? /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 From: public-html-a11y-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-a11y-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gregory J. Rosmaita Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 9:35 AM To: public-html-a11y@w3.org Subject: issues with global attribute "accesskey" as-is in HTML5 aloha! what follows is a list of issues with the accesskey attribute as defined in the current editor's draft of HTML5 when the HTML5 draft was submitted to the W3C by the WHAT WG, the accesskey attribute had been removed; http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/DroppedAttributeAccesskey the accesskey attribute was, however, subsequently re-added to HTML5, so this post is a discussion of the global attribute "accesskey" as it currently appears in the HTML5 draft: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/editing.html#the-accesskey-attribute ISSUE 1. is accesskey irretrievably broken as an attribute? is an attribute (@accesskey) sufficient to provide the needed functionality or should the element approach outlined in the Access Module/Element (which has the advantage of having been vetted and modified due to feedback provided by the WAI, UAAG and SVG WGs) be championed by the A11y TF? further discussion at: * http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Talk:Access/access_key_requirements ISSUE 2. Valid Accesskey Values in reference to accesskey values, the current draft of HTML5 states: QUOTE value must be an ordered set of unique space-separated tokens, each of which must be exactly one Unicode code point in length. UNQUOTE PROBLEM 2.1. accesskeys MUST be drawn from the charset used to render the natural language of the document in which they appear; an accesskey MUST be defined as a single character one Unicode code point in length from the document character set. ISSUE 3. Psuedo-Cascade of Multiple Accesskeys Definable for an Individual Element one can provide a "cascade" of accesskeys for an individual element using a space delimited list; to take the example currently in the HTML5 draft: QUOTE src-"http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/editing.html#the-accesskey-attribute" ... the search field is given two possible access keys, "s" and "0" (in that order). A user agent on a device with a full keyboard might pick Ctrl+Alt+S as the shortcut key, while a user agent on a small device with just a numeric keypad might pick just the plain unadorned key 0: <form action="/search"> <label>Search: <input type="search" name="q" accesskey="s 0"></label> <input type="submit"> </form> UNQUOTE PROBLEM 3.1. cascade order is a very "weak" rather than a strong binding -- how does the user know what accesskey to use when multiple accesskeys are assigned to an individual element? PROBLEM 3.2. "limited group of characters" -- there are a very finite number of characters that one can use as an accesskey; is the cascade of keys set using a space delimited list global? (that is, does every first item listed belong to accesskey-scheme A, the second to accesskey-scheme-B, etc. <form action="/search"> <label>Search: <input type="search" name="q" accesskey="s 0"></label> <input type="submit" accesskey="= 1"> </form> in the preceding code sample, is the first accesskey theme: 1. accesskey for input type="search" = s 2. accesskey for input type="submit" = = (for fellow speech users, the first acesskey is the character s while the second is the equals-sign) and the second: A. accesskey for input type="search" = 0 B. accesskey for input type="submit" = 1 (for fellow speech users, the first acesskey is the character 0 while the second is the character 1) if so, this needs to be explicitly stated in the HTML5 spec. ISSUE 4. HTML5 hard-binds "Action" to accesskey key-press: QUOTE src="http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/commands.html#command-facet-action" When the user presses the key combination corresponding to the assigned access key for an element, if the element defines a command, and the command's Hidden State facet is false (visible), and the command's Disabled State facet is also false (enabled), then the user agent must trigger the Action of the command. UNQUOTE PROBLEM 4.1. this is at variance with the Access Module/Element's architecture, which provides a boolean attribute "activate" which allows an author to set the AccessKeyPress to either move focus to the object for which the accesskey is defined (activate="no") or whether the AccessKeyPress results in the activation of the element to which the accesskey has been assigned (activate="yes") PROBLEM 4.2. the Access Module/Element's "activate" attribute also provides the following, which is lacking in the HTML5 draft: QUOTE src="http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-access/#sec_3.1.1." User agents MUST provide mechanisms for overriding the author setting with user-specified settings in order to ensure that the act of moving content focus does not cause the user agent to take any further action (as per Checkpoint 9.5 of UAAG 1.0) UNQUOTE REFERENCES: Reference 1. PF's initial feedback to HTML WG July 2007: * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Jul/0903.html QUOTE Outside of ARIA we would like HTML 5 to support the XHTML access element. The access element supports badly needed semantics for access key navigation but without the need for device dependency restrictions. UNQUOTE for references to accesskey in WCAG 1.0 and 2.0, please consult: * http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Access#Accesskey Reference 2. is accesskey irretreivably broken as an attribute? * http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Talk:Access/access_key_requirements Reference 3. accesskey in HTML5 (global attribute) * http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/editing.html#the-accesskey-attribute Reference 4. Last Public Draft of Access Module: * http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-access/ Reference 6. Last Editor's Draft of Access Module: * http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/ED-xhtml-access-20090423 Reference 7. "The Access Element: Enabling Generic Document Accessibility" [PFWG Proposed Internal Draft, 2010-05-19] * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/att-0020/access-element-20100519.html QUOTE source: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/0020.html [The Access Element draft] is intended to provide a starting point for work on the Access Element, based on the Last Call Draft of the XHTML Access Module http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526 and the subsequent editor's draft which reflected refinements to the Last Call draft due to feedback received during Last Call: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/ED-xhtml-access-20090423 Although this document is a PROPOSED first editor's draft, it is based on the Last Call Working Draft of the XHTML Access Module, produced by the XHTML 2 Working Group. The XHTML Access Module has been used as the basis of this document, as the XHTML Access Module reflects a consensus among the members of the XHTML2 Working Group, in conjunction with extensive input from the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group and others in the accessibility and standards community. Please note, as well, the new section entitled "Document Formatting Conventions" which explains the formatting conventions and mechanisms used so as to provide as much information to the user so that an individual user can tweak his or her technology to designate semantic markers, such as "good examples" (green text on white background) and "bad examples" (red text on white background) Note that a rather vague attempt at replacing CURIEs (upon which the XHTML Access Module had a dependency) with "named role values"; this is a topic which needs to be discussed by the PFWG (support for CURIEs now or in a future version, as was done with support for CURIEs in the ARIA suite). http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010May/att-0020/access-element-20100519.html ---------------------------------------------------------- He that will not apply new remedies must expect new evils; for time is the great innovator. -- Sir Francis Bacon ---------------------------------------------------------- Gregory J. Rosmaita: oedipus@hicom.net Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/
Received on Friday, 23 July 2010 13:03:39 UTC