RE: Comment 4 - Access keys

[*coordination item*]

In both the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines, and in the policy line that the Protocols and Formats Working Group has been following with formats, it is regarded as impossible or inadvisable to try to create a universal vocabulary of non-conflicting accessKey values.  Rather, the User Agent is supposed to allow the user to re-bind those that suffer conflicts in their delivery context.

Unfortunately a funny thing happened to the implementing language on the way to publication in the SMIL spec, I believe it was, or I would have for you a citation in W3C Recommendation status.  Charles, where was that?

This is just a heads up.  Don't have time at the instant to get you a full dress briefing on the precedents and positions in UA and PF.

Al

At 10:40 AM 2002-04-15 , john_slatin wrote:
>Thanks for this; I stand (or sit) corrected.
>John
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Thanasis Kinias [mailto:tkinias@optimalco.com] 
>Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:10 am
>To: 'w3c-wai-gl@w3.org'
>Subject: Re: Comment 4 - Access keys
>
>
>scripsit john_slatin:
>> I agree that it's important, when choosing accesskeys, to make sure 
>> that you're not using letters that are already "taken" by the browser.  
>> But that doesn't mean you're restricted to the numerals 0-9; it just 
>> means you can't use letters that already belong to the browser's 
>> top-level menus.
>
>If I may, you have no real way of knowing what the top-level menus will
>be--they're quite different in MSIE and NS, and more different still in
>Galeon, Konqueror, Opera, iCab, and other off-the-Microsoft-path user
>agents.  
>
>-- 
>Thanasis Kinias
>Optimal LLC
>Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
>

Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 11:06:06 UTC