- 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