- From: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 09:48:41 -0500
- To: mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Response in JRG2: At 04:46 PM 5/6/99 -0500, mark novak wrote: >At 3:53 PM -0500 5/6/99, Jon Gunderson wrote: >>Response in JRG: >> >>At 02:51 PM 5/6/99 -0500, mark novak wrote: >>>i'd also vote that we do not need a checkpoint for sequential access to >>>elements >>>which have an ACCESSKEY. >>> >>>what i'd expect to happen in those cases where more than one element >>>had the "same" ACCESSKEY, is that i'd be able to navigate between those >>>elements by repeatedly typing that same ACCESSKEY, which is basically >>>sequential access of sorts...otherwise, I think we already have access to the >>>element by virtue of the ACCESSKEY. >> >>JRG: That was the intention of the word sequential, if you have a better >>phrasing please post to the list. > >MN: wasn't trying to reword, still suggesting this checkpoint is not needed. JRG2: What other checkpoint do you see that covers the navigation to elements using the ACCESSKEY? > > >> >>>I do have another question however: >>> >>>Do we need a checkpoint for a "where am I" function, something that >>>would return information such as page title, location on page, element >>>with focus, previous page title was, summary, etc., while navigating >>>with in a page? >> >>JRG: That is in the section under orientation. >>Section 6 in the current guidelines. > >MN: great. suggest we add a link from navigation section >also, it that is easily possible. JRG2: I think the techniques section is where the different checkpoints need to be combined to demonstrate functional implementations of the checkpoints > > > >>Jon >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>At 11:00 AM -0500 5/6/99, Jon Gunderson wrote: >>>>In response to CMN: >>>>The sequential statement is due to the potential multiple definitions of >>>>the same accesskey in a document. If more than one control, link, label, >>>>... uses the same accesskey we want people to be able to navigate to each >>>>one. In the case of single definitions of an accesskey in a document then >>>>the sequential part is a mute point, the focus would move directly to that >>>>associated focusable element. >>>>Jon >>>> >>>>At 11:44 AM 5/6/99 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>I don't think that we should not have a checkpoint for ACCESSKEY. I do >>think >>>>>that a checkpoint requiring sequential access to elements which have an >>>>>ACCESSKEY is inappropriate - the purpose of the element is to provide >>access >>>>>to certain elements in a non-sequential manner. >>>>> >>>>>Charles McCN >>>>> >>>>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP >>>>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology >>>>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services >>>>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign >>>>1207 S. Oak Street >>>>Champaign, IL 61820 >>>> >>>>Voice: 217-244-5870 >>>>Fax: 217-333-0248 >>>>E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu >>>>WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund >>>> http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess >>> >>Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP >>Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology >>Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services >>University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign >>1207 S. Oak Street >>Champaign, IL 61820 >> >>Voice: 217-244-5870 >>Fax: 217-333-0248 >>E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu >>WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund >> http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess > Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign 1207 S. Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Voice: 217-244-5870 Fax: 217-333-0248 E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess
Received on Friday, 7 May 1999 10:43:17 UTC