- From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:30:44 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFF217CBA3.98B2B3E5-ON86256EF4.004DB85A-86256EF4.004FB8CC@us.ibm.com>
>At 03:54 PM 17/08/2004 +0100, Andy Budd wrote: >>Guideline 2.1 Make all functionality operable via a keyboard or a keyboard >>interface. >> >>Is this not a little subjective? For instance, if a web browser doesn't >>support tabbing between links or form elements, it's beyond the site >>developers ability to do anything about it. > >I take this one to discourage practices such as using onmouseover, >onmouseout as the sole means of triggering an event. Using the more >general onfocus or onblur if you must use events to trigger items on the >web page. Though being a tad more explicit about this might be good. > >Lynn I believe the guidance in the HTML Techniques needs to be very specific. The assumption that the browser is UAAG 1.0 compliant needs to be taken into account. For example, onMouseClick is fired by most browsers when pressing the keyboard Enter key. Should onMouseOver and onMouseOut also be triggered by the browser when tabbing to and from the element? Why not? Why put the burden on the author? We shouldn't ask to have it three ways; keep the event in the spec but ask the author to not use that event and then also ask the browser to provide access to that event anyway. The XHTML spec, WCAG 2.0 and UAAG 1.0 need to be considered as a set, and if there is contradiction, then it's probably WCAG 2.0 that may need to be corrected. In my opinion, WCAG 2.0 guideline 2.1 is good in principle (of course we all want all functionality to be operable via a keyboard), but in implementation it is most likely the browser that provides the keyboard access to the event. I believe the real problem is with the event spec in XHTML. For example, why was onFocus and onMouseOver both specified? Is there some real good reason to be able to specify both? In other words did the spec writers expect onFocus to work with either the keyboard, or the mouse, etc. etc. and onMouse to *only* work with the mouse? From an accessibility point of view, why did they do that? Regards, Phill Jenkins IBM Research - Accessibility Center http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2004 14:31:17 UTC