- From: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 22:53:33 +0200
- To: <Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
If we declare a dtd, and this dtd is a w3c dtd, we cannot use these...
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: "Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com"<Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com>
Inviato: 21/09/04 22.47.14
A: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Oggetto: RE: [#1063] APPLET alt text and alternative content
Regarding a proposed HTML technique about embed and applet, Roberto Scano
replied:
<Roberto>
Sorry, but embed and applet aren't elements that are not defined in any
W3C dtd?
</Roberto>
I think this raises an important issue about User agent supported
extensions. Does Guideline 4.1, "Use technologies according to
specification," preclude the use of these extensions if they are
accessible? When I read the level 1 success criteria I am still not
certain that embed and applet are prohibited or not? I definitely think
we need to make this clearer, but unfortunately I don't have any
wordsmithing proposals.
I am concerned about this issue because of the use of the contentEditable
and designMode attributes that are available on block level elements in IE
and Mozilla to implement HTML editing. If JavaScript is enabled (and that
is another open issue) I can make a version of an HTML editor that is
accessible using WindowEyes. Will this meet the 4.1 guideline?
thanks,
-becky
Becky Gibson
Web Accessibility Architect
IBM Emerging Internet Technologies
5 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA 01886
Voice: 978 399-6101; t/l 333-6101
Email: gibsonb@us.ibm.com
[Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 20:53:46 UTC