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

source vs content vs rendered content: item #207

From: Hans Riesebos <HRiesebos@alva-bv.nl>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:10:01 +0100
Message-Id: <s8e495af.052@mail.alva-bv.nl>
To: "<"<w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I am sorry for missing the telecon. I miscalculated the time. In europe we went to daylight savings time.

After reading the raw minutes, I am still confused on item #207.

Can anyone tell me where I go wrong in my reasoning? Below I give an example of what I think is source (or 'original source'), what is rendered content and what is content (or 'current content' or maybe even 'current source'). 

Here is just an example I found somewhere on the internet:

This is some source
       function displayPerson(color)
           document.write("<FONT COLOR='"+color+"'>Name:"+this.Name
       function Person(Name, Age, Country)
       neighbor= new Person("John Smith", 34, "Switzerland");

When "rendered" or executed, this will read from the screen (in blue text):
So next is the rendered content

   Name:John Smith

Which actually equals (what I consider to be the content):

   <P><FONT COLOR=blue>Name:John Smith<BR>
   Country:Switzerland </FONT></P>

When I read the definition of what content is in the UAAG it does not conflict with my view, because it refers to 'document source' (where document refers to the DOM-document?). 

When I ask for the source-view in IE5 I get the 'original source', that (in my opinion) would not satisfy checkpoint 2.1. If on the other hand it would give me the 'current source' it would satisfy the checkpoint (see definition of 'content' in the UAAG).

If the definition of content refers to 'original content', then programmatic control to the DOM will not give me the content and would not satisfy checkpoint 2.1!?

Please enlighten me
Hans Riesebos
ALVA BV, The Netherlands
Received on Friday, 31 March 2000 05:07:00 UTC

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