- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2018 17:29:31 -0500
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.nl>, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDYWLdq-DZkAMCtv6RAEA+dJGVXDJ1BUxCKqhJd073OUTw@mail.gmail.com>
However, I would not say "types" because it can be confused wth the "type" attribute if the <input>... in which case it might be something like this. “For the *list of common input fields* that are supported by the technology for specifying the purpose of specific fields, the purpose can be programmatically determined.” 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 Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 5:17 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: > I could live with it > > 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 Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 4:32 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> > wrote: > >> Most of this thread happened after-hours for me, coming back and >> reviewing the whole thing my preference would be Jake’s version because it >> creates an Appropriate separation from the technology by using a listing of >> purposes. >> >> >> >> If WCAG specifies the list of purposes rather than linking to HTML5.x >> directly, it: >> >> - Doesn’t have to include *all* of the HTML ones, minimising the >> author burden to the most relevant ones. Also, if HTML adds more of them, >> they would not be included automatically. >> >> - Could add techniques for aria/coga personalisation at a later stage >> with less fuss, transitioning from or extending the HTML list more easily. >> >> - Can put the ‘for this user’ aspect in the list rather than the SC >> text. (In my mind the ‘purpose’ for most of the fields is to apply to the >> user of the website only, so shouldn’t apply when doing it on someone >> else’s behalf.) >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> -Alastair >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) >> >> >> >> *My suggestion for "Support Common Input Fields":* >> >> >> >> “For the *list of common input fields* that are supported by the >> technology for specifying the purpose of specific types, the purpose can be >> programmatically determined.” >> >> >> >> Note: It is not expected that every technology supports the same list. >> Content implemented using a technology that supports a subset are excepted >> for fields that are not supported while a technology that supports a >> superset are encouraged to implement additional meanings. >> > >
Received on Sunday, 14 January 2018 22:29:56 UTC