W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > October 2014

RE: Proposal for Publishing REC Errata

From: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:39:39 +0000
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <cf1ccd3204014f44887c903307e43c94@BN1PR02MB183.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 5:35 PM
> To: public-w3process@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Proposal for Publishing REC Errata
> On 10/15/2014 08:26 PM, Stephen Zilles wrote:
> >
> > [SZ] As pointed out below, the first proposal is not very nice for accessible
> access (and is hard to read visually) and the second proposal makes it
> difficult to see the original text. Why not use a mark-up that has both the
> original REC text and the proposed replacement text; for example, <span
> class="errata"><span class="original">The REC text fragment</span><span
> class="replacement">The replacement text fixing the error.</span></span>.
> Then styling for normal access would make the "replacement" class be
> "display:none" and would put a yellow background (as a warning) on the
> "original" text. Then using either ":hover" or an explicit toggle on the "errata"
> <span>, the "replacement" text could be displayed to anyone that wanted to
> see it. This convention would, I believe, give better accessible access because
> instead of small fragments of insertions and deletions, the entire section that
> needed to be re-written would be present in two forms, either of which
> could be present!
>  ed to the
> viewer.
> I believe, Steve, that this is exactly what <ins> and <del> are for. :-)
[SZ] OK, I see your point. Mine was that if they are used on a whole text basis rather than a smallest change basis, the result is much more readable.
> ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2014 00:40:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:22 UTC