- From: Calogero Alex Baldacchino <alex.baldacchino@email.it>
- Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:52:33 +0100
Olli Pettay ha scritto: > On 11/26/2008 05:35 PM, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote: > anyway I think key events handling may >> be improved and become easier to adopt by adding to a somewhat interface >> a few constants representing the modifiers combination used by the >> browser to activate access keys, so those modifiers could be compared to >> the modifiers 'carried on' by the key event (this would require support >> for the DOM 3 Events, which I think could be improved/modified too -- if >> something like the above is yet present in html5 spec and I've missed >> it, I apologize). > > Note, accesskey events (http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/40) > won't be probably defined in DOM 3 Events (which is still just a draft). > And those events are anyway different thing to this problem. I agree that access keys and related events are outside the scope of W3C DOM, since it defines the basic interfaces to structure (or 'model') a generic document in order to make it dynamic and interactive through any programming technique (such as scripting), but without defining neither the 'interaction context' (i.e. a window object), nor the way to bind any part of the document to the 'interacting program' (i.e., embedding a script, defining how native events must be generated and binded to an element for its activation - and an access key with proper modifiers would be such). So, unless an 'accesskey' is thought as necessary for any element in every possible kind document, that's out of the most generic DOM scope. But when it comes to a specific document, specific properties binding to specific contexts can be added in the derived, specific DOM, by either deriving an interface (i.e. the HTMLElements inherits from the Element interface), or defining a separate interface to implement along with other interfaces of the same 'level' (i.e. the HTMLDocument interface does not inherit from the Document interface, yet both interfaces are implemented by an html document node). The latter whould be the case: since the accesskey attribute is specific to html elements and the key modifiers are specific to the user agent and to the underlying platform, an interface could be created, such as an 'HTMLKeyboardEvent', with just a read only boolean attribute, such as an 'activationKeys', telling whether the activation modifiers have been pressed; then such interface should be declared as necessary along with the DOM 3 KeyboardEvent, but, being separated (nor even inherited) from the latter, any change on DOM 3 Events draft wouldn't be 'traumatic' (once the drafte stabilized, the Window interface, which represents the browsing context for any document in a... browser, could declare the list of modifiers provided to activate a document element -- right now keyboard events are inited with a string representation of modifiers, though I'd prefer numeric values available for bitwise or operations, like Java virtual key codes, but that's another issue, and is off topic here). Let's come to your concern. > > I'd want it to be specified somewhere how accesskeys should behave in > display:none content. Because of the valid use case (dhtml menus) and > the current behavior of FF2/Safari/Opera and it-is-used-in-the-web, I think > allowing those accesskeys to work should be ok. > Of course if there is some *good* argument why they shouldn't work, that > behavior should be standardized. > > br, > > -Olli Perhaps a *goog* rationale could be, "if you can't see the control, and you can't reach (focus) the control and activate it 'normally', because the control is not presented to you as a part of the document, how can you be deemed aware of the control and of the way it can be activated? that's not the top of usability" (this is especially true for assistive technologies, which, as yet told by another contributor, may likely skeep everything which is not in the document presentation. -- from the usability point of view, the question is even more complex, since there is a current of thought considering the presentation of shortcut keys inside a menu item, along with it's label and underscored activation key, as a wrong practice, but the reasons of such are off this topic, so I'm not going any deeper about that). Another rational might be, "the same desired behaviour, both visual and 'operational', can be achieved without resorting to 'display:none' elements, so there is no need to 'break' the document presentation and allow the user interact with something which is not presented to him/her". So, I stand up for standardizing the "disallow accesskey activation for 'display:none' elements" behaviour. Regards, Alex. -- Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Scegli la tua suoneria! Il meglio della musica sul tuo cellulare! Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=8269&d=27-11
Received on Thursday, 27 November 2008 08:52:33 UTC