- From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 10:15:55 +0200
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
bugzilla@webby.trace.wisc.edu wrote: > [This e-mail has been automatically generated. The following NEW issue was added > to Bugzilla earlier today.] > > "onactivate" is Microsoft-only event > -> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1544 Your specification located here (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-SCRIPT-TECHS-20041119/) advocates using a non W3C standard event named "onactivate". This is an Microsoft only event and should not be promoted as part of a WC3 specification document candidate. Matt May's comment: The submitter is wrong. DOMActivate is a DOM Level 2 event: http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-Events/events.html Still, whether there is any benefit to using onactivate when UAAG specifies device-specific events to function in a device-independent fashion is a useful question to ask. It's certain to be more work for scripters, and the benefit to AT may be nil. Both onactivate and device-specific events should be tested with AT to determine the right technique. My comment: Althought there is a type of UIEvent in DOM 2 Events called DOMActivate, which "occurs when an element is activated, for instance, thru (sic!) a mouse click or a keypress", HTML or XHTML 1.x do not define an event handler attribute onactivate, that seems to be 'advocated' in the client-side ccripting techniques. -- Johannes Koch In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum. (Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2005 08:16:04 UTC