Re: any additional Proposals on UA requirement to handle exceptions

On 06/12/2013 18:07, Shane M Wiley wrote:
> Walter,
> 
> JS support is open source (Web-kit) so it's not as if they need to
> build it from scratch.  Alternatively, a blind user can leverage
> Safari or IE which have excellent text reader support (FF may as well
> but I only remember Victor, a blind member of our accessibility team,
> mentioning those two).
> 
> That said, you're bringing up exactly the use cases that overly
> burden version 1 of DNT.  If we narrow support to only web browsers
> to start we remove the network router issue.  If we narrow to only JS
> browsers, we remove situations where user preference is unbalanced.
> As we learn more in v1 we'll have the experience to guide how best to
> address these edge cases.

I am sorry Shane. Integrating web-kit into a text-only browser is still
a non-trivial undertaking. Especially with a small developer base.

Also, you have nowhere answered my questions a-d, stating that those are
cases where user preference is 'unbalanced' (whatever that may mean) is
not answering those questions.

Regarding burdening DNT: having a MUST support UGE requirement in it is
overburdening it. The easiest way not to overburden the TPE is by
remaining silent on the subject.

Regards,

 Walter

Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 17:18:15 UTC