- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 10:14:55 -0400
- To: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>
- Cc: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDYfBQ1tjG9ynMyBPXx2jm5eToMqBh7Vxsf=gixhMFOXEg@mail.gmail.com>
Fair enough... have updated to "content". Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> twitter.com/davidmacd GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> * Adapting the web to all users* * Including those with disabilities* If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:59 AM, Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu> wrote: > To make it a bit clearer > > We use both *content* and *web page* in the SC. We use Web page when > talking about the unit. We use content to refer to what is in a web page. > > Conformance is all based on the Web Page. All content on a page does > not need to conform — but all the information and function in a page must > conform. (there can be accessible and inaccessible versions of content on > the same page - for example a picture of a complex diagram in one place > (with simple alt text) and a text description of the same information in > another) > > > *g* > > Gregg C Vanderheiden > greggvan@umd.edu > > > > > On May 16, 2017, at 9:41 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> > wrote: > > @ John > I added "single printable Unicode code point" to definition of Character > key > > @Gregg Lowney > > >(1) We're supposed to use the term "content" rather than "web page". > > Actually, WCAG 2 doesn't use "content" in SCs. It uses Web Pages. It's a > long story but for good reason. > > - I've added "one or more" character keys, > - switched non-printing key with non-character key for consistency. > > > > *I see no reason to limit this SC to keyboard shortcuts* implemented > by content rather than have it apply more broadly to all keyboard commands > implemented by content. > > I'm not seeing the advantage of the wording here. I think of any keyboard > command implemented by the content as a keyboard shortcut. Can you point me > to a definition somewhere that necessitates this distinction between > keyboard command and keyboard shortcut? > > > > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > Tel: 613.235.4902 <(613)%20235-4902> > LinkedIn > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> > twitter.com/davidmacd > GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> > www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> > > > * Adapting the web to all users* > * Including those with disabilities* > > If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy > <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 8:20 AM, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> > wrote: > >> Greg wrote: >> >> > We should standardize on either "character key" or "printing key" >> rather than mixing the two terms in the same to mean the same thing. While >> "printing key" is the one I'm more used to seeing in the past, I think >> "character key" is more intuitive to readers unfamiliar with the concept. >> >> However, as I pointed out recently, even the terms "printing key" and/or >> "character key" have some issues elsewhere at the W3C, specifically around >> internationalization. >> >> "For example, on the Hindi INSCRIPT keyboard layout on Windows the TRA >> key (on number 6) when pressed generates the following Unicode code point >> sequence: U+0924 (TA) + U+094D (Virama) + U+0930 (RA). >> >> We suggest the following wording: >> >> If specified, the value must consist of a string representing an >> available keystroke. For most languages, this will be a single printable >> Unicode code point." >> (source: https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/485) >> >> At a minimum, our Technical standard should align with other W3C >> publications, and while I can live with continued colloquial use of either "printing >> key" and/or "character key", I will request that we also include a >> definition in our glossary that reflects the fact that what we mean is "single >> printable Unicode code point.". >> >> Thanks. >> >> JF >> >> >> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 2:48 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk >> > wrote: >> >>> On 16/05/2017 06:45, Gregg C Vanderheiden wrote: >>> [...] >>> >>>> But I can’t think of the disadvantage. >>>> >>>> can someone help me here? >>>> >>>> [...] >>> >>>> * it prevents the user from using the ‘e’ key for anything else — but >>>> (since this only happens if they have focus on the page — and there >>>> is nothing that the ‘e’ key can do on the page when not in edit mode >>>> — I’m missing the problem. >>>> >>> >>> I have made this particular point many times before as well...these >>> single-key commands would only trigger accidentally in situations where the >>> user is not on a control/element that is editable. However, it seems that >>> the main concern is accidental unintended triggering (e.g. by overeager >>> speech recognition, or by unintentionally hitting a key on the keyboard). >>> >>> P >>> -- >>> Patrick H. Lauke >>> >>> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke >>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com >>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> John Foliot >> Principal Accessibility Strategist >> Deque Systems Inc. >> john.foliot@deque.com >> >> Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion >> > > >
Received on Tuesday, 16 May 2017 14:15:31 UTC