W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: PROPOSAL: User Agent Issue 190:

From: <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 00:37:37 -0600
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
cc: mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>, User Agent Guidelines Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>, WAI Protocols & Formats WG <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <85256888.0025CC35.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com>

OK. So what do you suggest assuming we don't punt and go back to DOM 1?

I am also not happy with things like Mouse events in the state they are in
DOM 2 and would like to see them tossed. What other features of DOM 2
should we change.

I believe we need to:

- take as much of DOM 2 as is acceptable
- Exactly identify the elements that are not supported (and target these
for DOM 3) and indicate these to the UA group
- Work on cleaning up the appropriate DOM 2 event issues in DOM 3 (PF task)
- Determine what new features we need in DOM 3 (PF task as well)


Rich Schwerdtfeger
Lead Architect, IBM Special Needs Systems
EMail/web: schwer@us.ibm.com http://www.austin.ibm.com/sns/rich.htm

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.",

Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org> on 02/16/2000 01:26:21 PM

To:   mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>
cc:   Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, User Agent Guidelines
      Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>, WAI Protocols & Formats WG
Subject:  Re: PROPOSAL: User Agent Issue 190:

I agree. That's why I wrote
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000JanMar/0311 (and a few
similar things on the topic in teh past 18 months).

Charles McCN

  At 9:45 AM 2/16/00, schwer@us.ibm.com wrote:
  >Lets stop saying what we don't like and come up with a suitable interim
  >solution. Punting and going back to DOM1 is not the solution.
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2000 03:26:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:25 UTC