- From: Hans Riesebos <HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 10:38:57 +0100
- To: <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: "<"<w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Hi Ian, In general I find that the new texts reflect very well what we discussed and decided at the f2f. Just some very small suggestions<Hans> between these tags</Hans>: Proposal 1) For the Guideline rationale: <NEW> To ensure that assistive technologies can both operate the user agent programmatically (e.g., through simulated keyboard events) and monitor user agent output (e.g., output text), developers are expected to use each API appropriately. For example, for rendering text, developers are expected to use an API for drawing text. Developers should not, for example, convert text to a bitmap to be rendered via a graphical API; this may prevent other software from being able to use the text. </NEW> <Hans> I do find the "for example" for output more important. However could we give both output and input examples?</Hans> Proposal 3) Checkpoint 1.2 <NEW> Note. Developers should use APIs available at a higher level of abstraction than device APIs, provided that, in turn, these higher level APIs make use of the standard device APIs for the operating system. </NEW> <Hans> I find the sentence too difficult. Maybe also an example is needed. Does the next feel less complicated? <NEW> Note. When available, developers should use APIs at a higher level of abstraction than the standard device APIs for the operating system, but only if these higher level APIs properly use the standard device APIs. </NEW> </Hans> - Ian [1] http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#255 [2] http://cmos-eng.rehab.uiuc.edu/ua-issues/issues-linear.html#260 -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2000 04:40:24 UTC