- From: Judy Brewer <JBrewer@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:18:43 -0500
- To: Scott Isaacs <scotti@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "'raman@Adobe.COM'" <raman@Adobe.COM>, "'w3c-html-wg@w3.org'" <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>, "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>, w3c-wai-hc@w3.org
Scott, I've been following the dialog on the OPTION issue and would like to update the IPO/WAI Interest Group on the OPTION discussion, since they had reviewed the HC WG recommendations before sending these to the HTML WG. Is there a brief summary of your counter-proposal which I could excerpt for the IPO/WAI Interest Group list-serve, which is public, so they could consider this as well as the OPTION proposals they have already reviewed? Regards, Judy Brewer At 02:06 PM 10/27/97 -0800, Scott Isaacs wrote: >I have no objections to most of the recommendations from the WAI group >(although I will continue to ask for clarifications so I can better >understand them). I will review and very closely critique any WAI >recommendation that proposes a change to a core intrinsic control (or >any HTML construct). The proposed enhancements to the list box are >clearly written to improve accessibility and also provide an enhanced >experience to all users. This is a great idea. However, as I expressed >in many mails in the past few days, the proposal is wholly inadequate in >meeting the needs of a true hierarchical list. Even if a hierarchical >list was not intended, the proposed structure essentially creates one. >Unfortunately, it is not simple for me to just propose enhancements or a >counter-proposal for a hierarchical list without spending a large amount >of time examining many of the complexities hierarchy brings. > >I did offer a counter-proposal in my mail that serves the immediate goal >of chunking data without requiring modifications to the list box's >structure. I believe my proposal serves the immediate goals of the WAI >group and also ensures that we do not limit a further definition of a >structured, hierarchical list box. Whatever our mandate is beyond HTML >4.0, I definitely believe a rich hierarchical list box/ menu should be >on our requirements. > >Please don't read my objections the wrong way. I agree completely with >the goals of the accessibility group as I also see the positive impact >the WAI's work has at improving the usability and accessibility of the >web for everyone. I want us to be extremely careful before we modify the >structure of any existing HTML construct and examine the existing and >future impact of the enhancements beyond adding contextual and semantic >hints and clarifications. > >-Scott > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: T. V. Raman [SMTP:raman@Adobe.COM] >> Sent: Monday, October 27, 1997 1:38 PM >> To: 'w3c-html-wg@w3.org' >> Cc: 'Dan Connolly'; w3c-wai-hc@w3.org >> Subject: RE: SELECT/ OPTION GROUPS with the SIZE attribute >> >> Scott> I must be missing something about postponing this to >> Scott> another working draft - what is the rush to put this >> Scott> in HTML 4.0 and what is the objection to having >> Scott> another working draft post HTML 4.0 that addresses this? >> >> The attempt of us folks on the WAI to make sure that the >> accessibility recommendations make it into the officialW3C >> HTML 4.0recommendation is the hope and assumption that >> unlike in the case of commercial browser shipping >> deadlines, mainstream and accessibility features*will* get >> treated on an equal footing within the W3C. >> >> The recent past has evinced quite clearly that the above >> does not hold in the case of commercial browser ship >> decisions-- features affecting a minority of users do not >> typically hold back major product shipments. >> I cannot see any major vendor shipping a browser if the >> mouse support does not work-- but accessibility support does >> not typically have the same impact on shipment. >> >> However,I for one would be very disappointed in the >> effectiveness of the WAI if the same happened in the case of >> W3C recommendations. So at the meta-level, this is why I and >> others in the WAI would wish to make sure that no >> accessibility recommendation gets shoved aside for the >> "future". >> >> Many of us in the WAI have worked especially hard in the >> last month (as evinced by the volume on the mailing list) >> to meet the constraints of the HTML-WG's working deadlines-- >> at this point the onus is on the WG to: >> >> 1) Give these recommendations a fair hearing (which Dan >> Connolly as the chair of the HTML-WG has bee doing) >> >> 2) a) For members of the HTML-WG >> to constructively IMPROVE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WHERE NECESSARY >> >> b) Propose effective alternatives if appropriate >> --and if proposing an alternative describe clearly how the >> alternative will meet all of the >> needs addressed by the recommendation being replaced) >> 3) Integrate the updated recommendations into the official >> 4.0 recommendation >> >> >> I and others on the WAI-WG would be more than happy to >> consider and review any alternative proposals or >> constructive improvements that members of the HTML-WG can >> put forth based on their greater experience. >> >> --Raman >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> --raman >> >> Adobe Systems Tel: 1 (408) 536 3945 (W14-129) >> Advanced Technology Group Fax: 1 (408) 537 4042 >> (W14 129) 345 Park Avenue Email: raman@adobe.com >> San Jose , CA 95110 -2704 Email: raman@cs.cornell.edu >> http://labrador.corp.adobe.com/~raman/ (Adobe Intranet) >> http://cs.cornell.edu/home/raman/raman.html (Cornell) >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are my own and in no way should >> be taken >> as representative of my employer, Adobe Systems Inc. >> ____________________________________________________________ > ------------------------------------------------------- Judy Brewer jbrewer@w3.org 617-258-9741 Director, International Program Office Web Accessibility Initiative, World Wide Web Consortium MIT/LCS Room NE43-355 545 Technology Square, Cambridge MA 02138 USA
Received on Monday, 27 October 1997 18:18:15 UTC