W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-hc@w3.org > October to December 1997

RE: SELECT/ OPTION GROUPS with the SIZE attribute

From: Judy Brewer <JBrewer@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:18:43 -0500
Message-Id: <>
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

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?


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.
>> -----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
>> 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:35:00 UTC