- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 18:13:41 -0500
- To: Greg Lowney <greglo@microsoft.com>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Greg Lowney wrote: > > In today's conference call we discussed whether checkpoint 3.6 ("Allow > configuration so that an author-specified 'client-side redirect'...does not > change content except on explicit user request") should be raised from > priority 2 to priority 1. > > It seems to me that a user agent must already allow the user to override the > timing of auto-redirection in order to comply with checkpoint 2.2. The > latter reads "For a presentation that requires user input within a specified > time interval controlled by the user agent, allow the user to configure the > user agent to pause the presentation automatically and await user input > before proceeding", and it is priority 1. > > In fact, it seems that client-side redirection is in fact just an example of > "a presentation that requires user input within a specified time interval > controlled by the user agent", and therefore 3.6 is just a special case of, > and therefore redundant to, checkpoint 2.2. My understanding is that a client-side redirect requires no user input; after a time-delay, the user agent GETs a new page. Sometimes, the content that is available during the time-delay allows the user to manually GET the new content. But the user's input is not required to trigger the GET. - Ian > Is 3.6 valuable as a separate checkpoint, or should it be just one of the > examples given in the Note or Techniques for 2.2? > > Thanks, > Greg -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Thursday, 25 January 2001 18:13:49 UTC