- From: Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 08:17:42 +0900
- To: public-html@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20070704231739.GA30436@mikesmith>
Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>, 2007-07-04 20:03 +0200: > At 20:19 +0900 UTC, on 2007-07-03, Michael(tm) Smith wrote: > > Access-key markup on mobile sites is already in wide use for > > mobile-specific sites in Japan at least. It works quite well and > > users depend on it. The way that it's handled is that if you mark > > up an element with an access key, a 0-9 numbered button or star or > > hash button is rendered inline next to the displayed content of > > element. By convention that has grown up around it, the elements > > with access keys are generally grouped at the bottom of each page, > > and the mappings/bindings are consistent across all pages at the > > site. > > That sounds like it is used a lot for general site navigation (home, next, > previous, up, toc, search, help, etc.) In part -- but in the above, I omitted/elided over another common use case for it, which is in lists in the main text flow. > I must say that rel is much more appropriate for that. accesskey > could then be used for a login form for instance. I definitely agree about that. It would be a great thing if it were common for browsers to have support for rel that was exposed to users in a way that made it easy to find for them. But I don't think we can say we're there yet -- not even in the case of common desktop browsers, let alone for the cases of myriad of other devices/browsing contexts whose use cases we need to address: browsers on portable gaming devices like the Sony PSP and Nintendo Wii, browsers on home gaming devices like the Nintendo Wii and on set-top boxes, where the UI is a so-called "3-meter UI" or "10-foot UI" (you're 3 meters away from screen when using it), browsers accessible from back-of-seat screens on airplanes, etc. In the case of mobile browsers on handsets, since handsets have at least three (left, center, and right) "soft key" buttons that applications functions are commonly assigned to, and those are commonly used to provide popup menus/submenus in the application chrome, browsers could put the rel targets into a submenu that's activated by one of those soft keys. But we would still be left with the case of how to make it easier for users of keypad/5-way UIs to navigate quickly through lists. And beyond that, we would still need to deal with the mass of existing content that already uses accesskey. Which seems to me to imply that regardless of anything else, we need to have accesskey spec'ed in such as way to address those use cases -- if we want to try to provide interoperable handling of that existing content across implementations. I think it would be extremely helpful for the spec to outline preferred alternatives to accesskey when and where we have them, but that doesn't exclude the need to address how to support them interoperably as they are found already in the wild in existing content. > What I like about Chaals' proposal is that, although it mostly /speaks /of > accesskeys, it gives preference to rel. With rel, and standardised values for > it, users can get a UI that is *consistent across sites*. accesskey can only > provide consistency within a site. I agree. I am not advocating support in the spec for current accesskey use cases because I think accesskey is the ideal technical solution to address those use cases. I'm personally not particularly satisfied with accesskey as a good solution for navigation. But that's irrelevant -- if we have a requirement to handle HTML as it is spoken, I seems like we need to spec out interoperable behavior around that, regardless of whatever else we do/add to provide alternative markup and authoring guidance that better addresses the use cases. --Mike -- Michael(tm) Smith http://people.w3.org/mike/ http://sideshowbarker.net/
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2007 23:17:51 UTC