Re: Draft Response to RNIB Issue 92

Hi, Paul:

Just a couple tweaks to suggest for this draft mainly to make it clear
we're following specified HTML behavior, not making stuff up for
ourselves ... See inline below ...

Paul Grenier writes:
> Dean,
> 
> Thank you for your considerate feedback.
> 
> The task force evaluated the CSS Speech specification for a possible
> solution to our use cases. You can find the results of our research in the
> Gap Analysis document:
> https://w3c.github.io/pronunciation/gap-analysis_and_use-case.
> 
> The data-* is only intended to be a placeholder for prototype
JS Suggest: The data-* prefix is specified by HTML for prototype
implementations.
> implementation. We will eventually get our own attribute(s) once we
> coordinate with HTML standards groups.
> 
> We agree that a JSON schema would help implementors validate their work.
> However, browsers or AT may choose an event-base parsing approach which can
> not benefit from a schema. It will be their decision.
> 
> Errors triggered by malformed instructions will most likely go ignored, the
> way invalid HTML is currently treated. Once again, we feel this is under
JS Suggest: way the HTML specification specifies.
> the purview of the implementors. Although we encourage authoring tools to
> provide this feature, it goes beyond the realm of our specification at this
> time.

-- 

Janina Sajka
https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa

Received on Saturday, 17 July 2021 12:28:49 UTC