- From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 01:32:10 -0700
- To: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
- Cc: public-indie-ui <public-indie-ui@w3.org>
What about adding type tokens, such as "screenreader", "magnifier", etc.
On May 31, 2013, at 9:03 PM, Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net> wrote:
> 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 Tuesday, 4 June 2013 08:32:41 UTC