- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:04:10 +0200
- To: public-pfwg-comments@w3.org
The following states and properties lack UA processing requirements: datatype, haspopup, invalid, readonly, required, valuemax, valuemix, valuenow, busy, dropeffect, controls, describedby, labelledby, owns The following states and properties are implementation/configuration dependent: level, channel, relevant, posinset, setsize, templateid The following states and properties describe what they are supposed to do but not in the form of requirements on UAs: autocomplete, checked, disabled, expanded, multiline, multiselectable, pressed, secret, selected, atomic, live, grab, activedescendant, tabindex, flowto, hidden, sort Without clear UA processing requirements, it doesn't seem realistic to get two interoperable implementations *of the spec*--at most implementation may become interoperable by reverse engineering each other or by using out-of-spec information. How is the spec expected to advance to a REC if there are no clear requirements for implementors to follow and no way to determine if two interoperable implementations exist? http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-wai-aria-practices-20080204/#MappingToAPIs is not comprehensive and is marked as informative. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2008 10:04:48 UTC