- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 05:02:12 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13436 --- Comment #10 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-08-13 05:02:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > (In reply to comment #7) > > > (In reply to comment #6) > > > "means that UAs have to follow it > > > > unless they have a good reason not to." > > > > > > This is a vague phrase that means very little from a technical perspective. The > > > UA may decide the "good reason" is because they just don't feel like doing it. > > > It's entirely subjective. > > > > You don't understand what the RFC 2119 keywords mean. Please read > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt > > And the HTML5 spec states UAs "should" display the video control when scripting > is disabled, yet only one UA does. So much for "should". You don't understand how to file browser bugs. > There is no reason not to provide a facility to choose tracks if the control is > displayed. Well, unless there's a particular reason to deliberately disable > video accessibility. Is there a reason to deliberately disable video > accessibility? > > What is one good use case for not ensuring this capability? The spec doesn't mandate UI. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 13 August 2011 05:02:17 UTC