- From: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 14:03:47 +1000
- To: public-indie-ui <public-indie-ui@w3.org>
I'm on record as expressing doubts about whether User Contexts should allow active assistive technologies to be disclosed, primarily for the reason that this could harm interoperability and standards-conformance by encouraging Web application authors to write to the implementation rather than to the specifications and to introduce AT-specific hacks that work around bugs. This practice reduces the incentive for AT developers to fix bugs or to achieve greater interoperability, and thus could be bad in the long run even if it assists users in the short term. Nevertheless, if we are going to disclose assistive technologies, as was pointed out to me off-list in response to my requirements-gathering proposal, the current requirements and spec are inadequate: they cover only screen readers and allow only one name and version to be retrieved, whereas there could be several independent assistive technologies (screen reader, screen magnifier, etc.) active on a user's system simultaneously. Proposal dictionary assistiveTechnology { DOMString name; DOMString? version; }; then return a sequence or array of the above.
Received on Saturday, 1 June 2013 04:04:13 UTC