- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 22:53:34 -0400
- To: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
- CC: "'Jon Gunderson'" <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cynthia Shelly wrote: > > I tend to agree with Jon that people will be looking for JavaScript or DHTML > rather than DOM. Could we solve this by calling the section DOM and adding > the other related non-W3C technologies in parens? Something like: > > Section 12.8 DOM (Includes JavaScript, DHTML, blah, foo, and stuff) > > That way a visual scan or text search for one of these technologies would > get people to the right place. Seems reasonable to me. JG: > Wendy, > It seems to me that JavaScript is what people would more likely be looking > for accessibility information on, than a topic called the DOM. > > Jon > > At 07:21 AM 5/2/00 -0400, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: > >I have included "DOM" in the list. > >--w > > > >At 11:10 AM 4/28/00 , Jon Gunderson wrote: > >>I would like to see "JavaScript" under the added requirements in the > >>following section: > >> > >>1. Add requirements beyond HTML and CSS > >> > >>I know that scripting is alluded to in the following statement: > >>"Clearly specify how content that is tailored according to client or user > >>capabilities may conform (dynamic content or database driven)" > >> > >>But I think it should have its own section for some of the following > reasons: > >> > >>1. What is the "standard" or "recommended" way to support the DOM. > >>Currently IE and NN support different models for access the DOM with > scripting. > >> > >>2. Designing for device independence. > >> > >>3. Identifying open versus proprietary scripting markup techniques -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2000 22:53:42 UTC