Re: User Contexts: identifying assistive technologies

Every page request is sent with browser and OS version. This is no different, and no one is forcing a a user to expose anything. This will be triggered in rare circumstances with a user-configurable settings and confirmation dialogs similar to location sharing dialogs.

On Jun 21, 2013, at 3:30 PM, raman@google.com (T.V Raman) wrote:

> 1+.  In general, these interfaces should never expose  details of
> the runtime to this degree -- 
> 
> Richard Schwerdtfeger writes:
>> We are really stepping on privacy issues be forcing the user to have to expose the fact they are using a screen reader to be able to use a site.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> On Jun 4, 2013, at 1:00 PM, "James Craig" <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jun 4, 2013, at 1:43 AM, Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:
>>>>> What about adding type tokens, such as "screenreader", "magnifier", etc.
>>>> 
>>>> Excellent. An AT can support more than one function.
>>> 
>>> On second thought, I don't think that will work. Part of the reason for splitting these up into separate WebIDL dictionaries is to support a hasFeature() detection method
>> similar to DOMImplementation.hasFeature().
>>> 
>>> Just to make sure you're seeing the entire WebIDL blocks, you should be viewing the editor's drafts in a JavaScript enabled browser.
>>> 
>>> So for this existing WebIDL dictionary…
>>> 
>>> dictionary ScreenReaderSettings {
>>>    boolean?   screenReaderActive = null;
>>>    DOMString? screenReaderName = null;
>>>    DOMString? screenReaderVersion = null;
>>> };
>>> 
>>> …an author could do something like this: (Specific syntax TBD)
>>> 
>>> if (window.settings.hasFeature('ScreenReaderSettings')) {
>>> var isScreenReaderActive = window.settings.valueForKey('screenReaderActive');
>>> }
>>> 
>>> I think we'd want to set up a different *feature* altogether for 'MagnifierSettings' to standardize properties like zoom level, zoom window size, center point, etc.
>>> 
>>> 
>>

Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 22:34:23 UTC