- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 13:35:10 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
- cc: allan_jm@tsb1.tsbvi.edu, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
It is something nice. It is only relevant to HTML. The capability to understand it is important in an HTML User Agent (which is the main case here), but that is already required by 7.1.1 The ability to know what key commands are available is important. That is already available in 4.3 (3 checkpoints, all Priority 2. The second and third are most relevant in this case) The abilities it provides are extensions of things which are already required at higher priority level - non-sequential access to various types of control. Therefore I think the checkpoint is redundant, and need not be in the document. Charles McCN On Fri, 7 May 1999, Jon Gunderson wrote: I think I am being misunderstood here. The checkpoint is designed to do things: 1. Indication of implmentation of a navigation command to elements with ACCESSKEY based on the specified key i.e ALT-A or Command-A for ACCESSKEY=A 2. If multiple element use the same key for the ACCESSKEY attribute the command would need to allow each element defined with that ATTRIBUTE to be accessed. This is where the word sequential comes from, it would only move between elements with the same ACCESSKEY definition. This is currently how IE implements access key function. If this is an important navigation scheme, then I think it needs a checkpoint. If it something nice it can stay buried in the compatibility section. Is this something important or not? Jon At 10:40 AM 5/7/99 -0500, you wrote: >I agreee with Charles and Mark, I don't see a need for a checkpoint for >sequential navigation of elements with accesskeys, you can already get to >the elements by link access, form control navigation, etc. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On >> Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile >> Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 9:59 AM >> To: Jon Gunderson >> Cc: mark novak; w3c-wai-ua@w3.org >> Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Checkpoint for ACCESSKEY >> >> >> 7.1.1 Priority 1 Support Accessibility features for HTML >> >> seems to cover it for me. >> >> Charles >> >> On Fri, 7 May 1999, Jon Gunderson wrote: >> >> We have no specific checkpoint in the current WD, so I would like to >> document that the group would like to include a specific >> checkpoint. For >> the accesskey attribute I recommend that we have a specific checkpoint. >> Jon >> >> >> At 11:04 PM 5/6/99 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >> >There was such a checkpoint in the previous draft. I haven't >> checked the >> >document, but I was under the impression that this had not >> been dropped. Some >> >time ago I suggested that this checkpoint be clarified to >> specify exactly >> >what kind of information was necessary. >> > >> >Charles >> > >> >On Thu, 6 May 1999, mark novak wrote: >> > >> > 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? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >--Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org >> >phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles >> >W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI >> >MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA >> > >> 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 >> >> >> --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org >> phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles >> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI >> MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA >> >> > 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 --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Friday, 7 May 1999 13:35:20 UTC