W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2009

Re: Web Browser Preferences and Internationalisation/Accessibility

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:39:53 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02830911211639w46e662f4oc804333b3595d1e1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org
2009/11/22 Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>:
> 2009/11/20 Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>:
>> 2009/11/20 Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>:
>>>>> Maybe then the discussion has to move to the WHATWG.
>>>>> I was indeed uncertain if this was the correct forum.
>>>> Discussing at WHATWG is fine, but, as I said in my reply to Shelley,
>>>> public-html is an appropriate forum for this discussion.
>>> It would indeed be inappropriate to quash this discussion even though it's tangential to this group's chartered work. Moving to WHATWG is undesirable, IMO. I'm in favour of continuing here if the participants feel like it. But no longer than until some spec text of more general applicability than just HTML is drafted, as the problem at hand isn't particularly related to this markup language. Fortunately, more appropriate groups with expertise in i18n and a11y exist at W3C. That's where I see it moved eventually.
>> I guess this discussion has raised the larger issue that agent
>> preferences and javascript access to such preferences should probably
>> be as much part of the HTML5 specification as the javascript interface
>> to elements is. I have seen several places in the existing spec that
>> recommend exposure and usage of user/agent preferences, but none
>> really where they are prescribed. This, to some extent may be the
>> cause of the problem that I pointed out where Web page authors cannot
>> rely on a cross-browser workable interface to determine the OS/user
>> language preference.
> Sorry if I gave an impression earlier that I'm wanting to quash your
> discussion Sylvia. I don't agree with the request, but, as I hoped I
> made clear in my response, I was primarily responding to your request
> for opinions.
> However, I do have a suggestion for you. We now have a formal
> procedure in place for addressing changes to the HTML5 specification.
> Can I recommend that you submit a bug on this issue, and attach this
> email thread as a link? That way your request is given due diligence
> within the new HTML5 process.

I'm not sure it's a bug yet. I am here to discuss this and solicit
opinions, since I am not sure about the boundaries of what belongs
into HTML5 and what doesn't. So, I am keen to hear opinions one way or
the other, so I can learn.

Received on Sunday, 22 November 2009 00:40:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:03 UTC