Re: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 4: Rendering by user agent

Hi Richard,

"For such scripts it is likely to be better to give
  the control to the author when identifying the character to highlight."

Thanks for the comment. We agree with you, and think the current text  
covers this case exactly:

"We recommend that authors include the access key character in label text  
or wherever
the access key is to apply."

The other case is only for when a UA *can* do something itself. In your  
example it probably can't, and so the above recommendation applies.

Are you happy with this?

Best wishes,

Steven Pemberton


On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:13:27 +0200, <ishida@w3.org> wrote:

>
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526/
>
> Comment 4
> At  
> http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0806-xhtml-access/Overview.html
> Editorial/substantive: S
> Tracked by: RI
>
> Location in reviewed document:
> 3.1.2  
> [http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526/#sec_3.1.2.]
>
> Comment:
> "The rendering of access keys depends on the user agent. We recommend  
> that authors include the access key character in label text or wherever  
> the access key is to apply. If the user agent can recognize that the  
> currently mapped access key character appears in the label text of the  
> element to which it is mapped, then the user agent may render the  
> character in such a way as to emphasize its role as the access key and  
> distinguish it from other characters (e.g., by underlining it)."
>
> This is likely to be problematic for non-Western text. For example, in  
> scripts that combine character into complex shapes (such as  
> Hindi/Devanagari or Urdu/Nastaliq) it can be difficult to isolate a  
> specific character. For such scripts it is likely to be better to give  
> the control to the author when identifying the character to highlight.
>
> In some cases the author may include the access key in parentheses after  
> the label, in others they may prefer to highlight a letter in the label  
> itself.
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 26 November 2008 14:38:20 UTC