W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: HPR Evaluation

From: <thatch@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 22:10:32 -0500
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net>
cc: User Agent Guidelines Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <852567E0.00117455.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com>

I think I understand your argument about the graphical view, but I don't agree
with it.

You mentioned working out the details between IBM SNS and Netscape. That's a
joke, We couldn't (didn't) even get the interested enough to have a look/listen
to HPR. The HPR implementation, which uses Plugin technology, Java, Java Script,
and DDE was done by the developer in Japan with no support or help from

Jim Thatcher
IBM Special Needs Systems

"Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net> on 09/01/99 01:49:30 PM

To:   James Thatcher/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc:   User Agent Guidelines Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Subject:  Re: HPR Evaluation

aloha, thatch!

please, don't worry about not answering my questions earlier -- i am simply
glad that you took my note as it was intended: as a nudge, and definitely not a

you bring up 2 interesting points: first, that -- as regards its interaction
with HPR -- quote Netscape is closer in concept to the a protocol (HTTP) for
HPR than it is a user interface.unquote

yet, as intriguing as that line of thought may be, i would, however, like to
discuss the second point you raised in a bit more detail...  you noted that, in
HPR's default configuration, synchronization with the Netscape view is set to
OFF...  while i admit that most HPR users may never change the default setting,
there are definitely feasible slash probable scenarios where one can envision a
blind user changing the setting so as to work with sighted colleagues, to teach
sighted colleagues about the web, to illustrate a point to a web or intranet
development team, etc.

but that isn't really the gist of my concern...  what concerns me is that the
"graphical view", which HPR is capable of importing from Netscape is available
to the user...  therefore, it seems only logical that, since the graphical
rendering of a document is available upon demand, the presentation of the
graphical view should be governed by the UI-related checkpoints...

as for the issue of upon whose shoulders the responsibility for ensuring that
the "graphical view" is compliant, i suppose that that is something that needs
to be worked out between IBM SNS and Netscape...

thanks again for helping us work out this issue -- speaking personally, i have
found your insights to be quite valuable in my own evaluation of the UAGL...


At 10:33 AM 9/1/99, Jim Thatcher wrote:
>Sorry Gregory that your questions didn't get answered. HPR cannot run without
>Netscape and HPR cannot be adapted for IE or Opera or anything else. Yes we
>allow users to view Netscape, but in the default configuration
>off) that would not be interesting because only the starup page would be
>Netscape is closer in concept to the a protocol (HTTP) for HPR than it is a
>user interface.

He that lives on Hope, dies farting
     -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
   President, WebMaster, & Minister of Propaganda,
        VICUG NYC <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/>
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 1999 23:11:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:22 UTC