Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed interfaces?

​Then let's try to define popup and use that, I like that idea better.​ And
make a distinction between switching content and adding 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, Jan 9, 2018 at 4:36 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote:

> I should have noted the downside to adding that back in.  While the low
> vision benefit is perfectly safe, the benefit to keyboard-only users is
> somewhat diminished.
>
> Take, for example, a horizontal sub-menu bar which is inserted below the
> main menu bar when one of its items receives focus (i.e. nothing is
> obscured).  The ability to dismiss would allow a keyboard user to hit ESC
> to skip the sub-menu and go to the next main menu item instead of probably
> having to tab all the way through the sub-menu.  This kind of very
> inefficient focus management is not covered by any other SC.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abma, J.D. (Jake) [mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.nl]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 4:24 PM
> To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>;
> Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com; david100@sympatico.ca;
> jon.avila@levelaccess.com
> Cc: akirkpat@adobe.com; jjwhite@ets.org; melanie.philipp@deque.com;
> acampbell@nomensa.com; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
>
> +1 works fine for me, thanks Steve
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Repsher, Stephen J [stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 10:17 PM
> To: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com; david100@sympatico.ca;
> jon.avila@levelaccess.com
> Cc: akirkpat@adobe.com; jjwhite@ets.org; melanie.philipp@deque.com;
> acampbell@nomensa.com; Abma, J.D. (Jake); w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
> To clarify, I never said that the tabs weren't focusable, just that the
> content wasn't becoming visible on focus.  In retrospect, being technically
> astute might lead us to look at the underlying JavaScript to see if the
> code to display the additional content was occurring onfocus() or maybe
> onkeypress().  As Brooks is saying though, it really doesn't matter whether
> we come to an agreement on that if we can agree on a simple change.
>
> I propose simply adding back in the part about obscuring other content and
> moving on, so the Dismissable condition would then read:
>
> "A mechanism is available to dismiss the additional content without moving
> pointer hover or keyboard focus, unless the additional content communicates
> an input error or does not obscure other content;"
>
> Any objections to that?
>
> Steve
>
> From: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com [mailto:Brooks.Newton@
> thomsonreuters.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 4:04 PM
> To: david100@sympatico.ca; jon.avila@levelaccess.com
> Cc: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; akirkpat@adobe.com;
> jjwhite@ets.org; melanie.philipp@deque.com; acampbell@nomensa.com;
> Jake.Abma@ing.nl; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
> +1 to Jonathan's and David's perspective on this.  I agree with them.  I'm
> also right in the middle of documenting, implementing and testing this
> design pattern, so the hair splitting semantic exercise of what is change
> in focus versus what is a change in selection means less to me than the
> practical implications of observing new content display upon pressing arrow
> keys, not space or enter, as the ARIA Authoring Practices 1.1 recommends
> (automatic activation)<https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/
> #tabpanel>.
>
> Brooks
>
> From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 2:53 PM
> To: Jonathan Avila
> Cc: Repsher, Stephen J; Andrew Kirkpatrick; White, Jason J; Melanie
> Philipp; Alastair Campbell; Abma, J.D. (Jake); WCAG
> Subject: Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
> Hi Steve
>
> I have to confess... I've never made that distinction that if you move to
> an actionable control with an arrow key rather than a tab key it is not a
> focusable element.
>
> Is there anywhere official you can point me (and Jonathan) to that makes
> that distinction.
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_
> davidmacdonald100&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-
> 1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=Nbi9AH0h8-
> L9CLAwMuLUNGEvS5hc407lzLtgJbUIqdQ&e=>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/
> url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_davidmacd&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-
> 1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=
> WNU0Ie8nmNbq8CwcW1pqIbwToGoatG5UUeYDrcCd4jw&e=>
>
> GitHub<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__github.com_DavidMacDonald&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-
> GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEn
> qb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=
> ids073a6Zh19lECDL642TLje1Fc8AADGFK4xVFUTod0&e=>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/
> url?u=http-3A__www.can-2Dadapt.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-
> 1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=Md-AXeyAZZdsesDVd95A0-
> TK2Dy4eoL3cnqaG6U6dv0&e=>
>
>
>
>   Adapting the web to all users
>             Including those with disabilities
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.davidmacd.com_
> disclaimer.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=
> W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=M-UFUfp1G7Q68X1-
> qzhOyEKAxpAUyON3Pko5NlyvZjE&e=>
>
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com<
> mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com>> wrote:
> In my opinion switching between tabs with arrow keys is changing focus and
> selection.   Just as moving up and down in an ARIA combo box with pop up
> list that takes focus moves both selection and focus.
>
> Jonathan
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 9, 2018, at 2:40 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <
> stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>> wrote:
> I'll try to reply to various comments throughout this thread...
>
> First, it is unclear to me from issue #650 whether or not the commenter is
> talking about true tabbed interfaces, or simply menus that respond to
> tabbing.  However, it doesn't really matter what the UI component actually
> is but rather how it functions using a keyboard or pointer.  If stuff
> appears on focus or hover, then it applies.
>
> With regard to the applicability to tabbed interfaces (i.e.
> role="tab")...The answer depends on how the keyboard and pointer
> interactions are implemented.  Taking the ARIA Authoring Practices example,
> Andrew is correct in saying that the SC is not applicable because keyboard
> focus on the tab is not what makes its associated tabpanel appear.  The
> tablist receives focus and simply transfers it to the currently displayed
> tab, then the next focusable element is the tabpanel.  There are only 2
> ways to make the "additional" tab panel content appear:
>
> 1.       Click the tab with the pointer, or
>
> 2.       Move focus into the tablist, then use the arrow keys to select a
> new tab.  This is functionally equivalent to a <select> which displays
> different content onblur or on selection.
> Thus, there is no real applicability for the SC in this example.  And
> furthermore, most tabs that I experience pretty much use an onclick()
> approach since it's the easiest way to also be mobile-friendly, so there's
> no applicability for most tabs in the wild either.
>
> So, could the SC apply to a tabbed interface?  Yes, certainly, but only if
> it truly works on just hover and/or focus, and that would be a horrible
> user experience for everyone in most tab applications.
>
> I'm happy to add some stuff to the Understanding discussing tabs to
> reflect all this.
>
> With regard to defining "additional content"... I view this as already
> defined by the SC language itself, i.e. anything that requires an element
> to be focused or hovered before it becomes visible is the additional
> content.  Referring to it as "additional" is nothing more than a
> convenience so that it is clear what is being talked about in the 3
> conditions and has no other meaning beyond that.  I think the Understanding
> already makes this clear.
>
> With regard to going back to popup, popover, or scoping to "overlay"...
> This was extremely confusing for many folks even with a clear definition,
> and that definition would need to scope it to the same content as is now,
> so I do not agree with going back down that winding road.  Moreover,
> scoping to only overlays misses the point of the Hoverable and Persistent
> conditions, i.e. those conditions are there to assist with viewing and
> operating the additional content and it's irrelevant whether or not
> anything else is being obscured.
>
> With regard to the general notion of additional content that is not
> overlaying or obscuring anything else... I originally had this in the
> Dismissable bullet, but the working group discussed it and decided to
> remove it.  That is, it originally read: "..., unless the additional
> content communicates an input error or does not obscure any other
> content."  I'm fine with adding that back in if the group feels it is
> important, but that seems irrelevant to issue #650.
>
> Steve
>
> From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 9:13 AM
> To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>>;
> White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>>
> Cc: Melanie Philipp <melanie.philipp@deque.com<mailto:
> melanie.philipp@deque.com>>; Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com
> <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>; Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.nl
> <mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.nl>>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-
> wai-gl@w3.org>>; Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:
> stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
> Subject: Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
> Would be good to hear from Steve about David's last question ("without
> moving the pointer")...
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/
> v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_awkawk&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-
> 1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=
> to005lQrySSY5XSL3I4GUu2hMQD9TW2J7iSMxEqkRAI&e=>
>
> From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca
> >>
> Date: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 09:09
> To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>>
> Cc: Melanie Philipp <melanie.philipp@deque.com<mailto:
> melanie.philipp@deque.com>>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com
> <mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>, "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.nl
> <mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.nl>>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-
> wai-gl@w3.org>>, "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<
> mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
> Subject: Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 09:06
>
> I agree with going back to using popup, or something similar and then
> defining it.
>
> For me, "overlay" makes me think of a light box, dialogue box etc., which
> is not generally a hover based popup... but could live with it if it's
> defined or clear in another way the the SC is not talking about those
> things.
>
> I also hope we address the first bullet regarding closing the popup
> "without moving the pointer". The pointer can't do anything without moving,
> can it?
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902<tel:(613)%20235-4902>
>
> LinkedIn
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-
> 253A-252F-252Fwww.linkedin.com-252Fin-252Fdavidmacdonald100-26data-
> 3D02-257C01-257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-257C1b834c3267a1401141d408d557
> 6aa824-257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1-257C0-257C0-
> 257C636511037986556013-26sdata-3DRXjoK-252BQSrASybKHpuekjkWn8gCASZXRh
> mtskbWEecAE-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-
> GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEn
> qb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=
> tGzPMSSo2S0ETOLJmWKAVPjaE711NbbLW5SZSEIKhyE&e=>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/
> url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.
> com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Ftwitter.com-252Fdavidmacd-
> 26data-3D02-257C01-257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-
> 257C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824-257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
> decee1-257C0-257C0-257C636511037986556013-26sdata-
> 3DVFyQOEHH4rswqjT4fAxYx1Nq1-252FRuiLRgySJXsm8Lvjw-253D-
> 26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=
> W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=fJ44Y833xTP42ilv2PHSS6XVl0-
> 8ZNzEYGKviYRDUbE&e=>
>
> GitHub<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-
> 253A-252F-252Fgithub.com-252FDavidMacDonald-26data-
> 3D02-257C01-257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-257C1b834c3267a1401141d408d557
> 6aa824-257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1-257C0-257C0-
> 257C636511037986556013-26sdata-3DR9guICJvEtWHXiOrw7pHEZsN7hGJ
> KEMGDg-252B57iQtKdE-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=
> 4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=
> W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=lV70WkwWjDbKS10iz9-
> 4iG6oJZHY5f_PVeUhuLl73gw&e=>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/
> url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.
> com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Fwww.can-2Dadapt.com-252F-
> 26data-3D02-257C01-257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-
> 257C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824-257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
> decee1-257C0-257C0-257C636511037986556013-26sdata-3Dy-252Fl-252B-
> 252BjyVXSsCqz9C4HEh-252B-252FdINxl-252FupDQs2s-
> 252FQfgEYoI-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-
> GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEn
> qb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=Ll-
> DxOrHxMnLgvRkX5y39P49x38ZHwReEwirBLWLZiM&e=>
>
>
>
>   Adapting the web to all users
>             Including those with disabilities
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-
> 253A-252F-252Fwww.davidmacd.com-252Fdisclaimer.html-26data-3D02-257C01-
> 257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-257C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824-
> 257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1-257C0-257C0-257C636511037986556013-
> 26sdata-3DyFSCmytaEgts7eziLkG2UoY2g1sKhfg2r-252F8htWTUvvg-253D-
> 26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=
> W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=EW_
> YklH0jdiQr25vMV38Cs99vqtZxZ8RFJu_Xneqwck&e=>
>
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 8:53 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:
> jjwhite@ets.org>> wrote:
> I think we should explore this option to see whether it covers the desired
> cases - and only them.
>
> From: Melanie Philipp [mailto:melanie.philipp@deque.com<mailto:
> melanie.philipp@deque.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:35 AM
> To: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:jjwhite@ets.org>>
> Cc: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>;
> Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.nl<mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.nl>>; WCAG <
> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>; Repsher, Stephen J <
> stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
> Subject: Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed
> interfaces?
>
> Did you explore the word "overlay"? As in:
>
> "When pointer hover or keyboard focus triggers additional content that
> overlays other content, the following are true:"
>
> Perhaps no new definition would be required with this approach.
>
> Melanie Philipp, CPACC, WAS
> Senior Digital Accessibility Consultant
> 540-848-5220<tel:(540)%20848-5220>
> www.deque.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.
> safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-
> 252Fwww.deque.com-26data-3D02-257C01-257Cjjwhite-2540ets.org-
> 257Ce8e6783165f245ebfec608d55765cf55-257C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd
> 9e9b65-257C0-257C0-257C636511017148326835-26sdata-3Dl5ZDl1U-
> 252BmyHTTmbDvxEhoE1kpRrgVYmZupozmjm7gWM-253D-26reserved-3D0&
> d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=
> W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=
> b6IWd9VqSikzWprNOkpuQlpIv7mFCD-lhxld_Nmh13k&s=TfjnkSdDZVyJUExgZOB2JyWseJg_
> K3bzZ50d5yStEMU&e=>
>
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 7:59 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org<mailto:
> jjwhite@ets.org>> wrote:
>
>
> From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:
> acampbell@nomensa.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 5:00 AM
>
> I agree it would help to have something like 'pop-over' as the target of
> the SC. I'm fairly sure we did at one stage, Steve (CCed) might be able to
> remember why we dropped that?
> [Jason] The term was used (with disagreement about whether it should be
> "popup" or "popover"), but I don't recall there being a definition. It was
> relatively uncontroversial, as I recall, that these terms did not have a
> generally accepted meaning that was clear or precise enough to meet our
> testability requirements.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> ATTENTION:
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the
> intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or
> disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message
> immediately.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>