- From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:59:01 -0500
- To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Regrets. My son is playing in the Triple Crown World Series this week. Rich Schwerdtfeger Senior Technical Staff Member IBM Accessibility Center Research Division EMail/web: schwer@us.ibm.com "Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.", Frost "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org> To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu> Sent by: cc: Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, w3c-wai-ua-requ w3c-wai-ua@w3.org est@w3.org Subject: Re: Responses to Tantek Çelik issues raised during third last call of UAAG 1.0 07/09/2001 12:13 PM Jon Gunderson wrote: > > With event bubbling model used for scripting, every element potentially can > be interactive. No, potentially "enabled". > The user agent can make pretty good assumptions from the > markup that elements with an "on" event hander, marked up as a link or > input controls is an interactive element. Other elements maybe interactive > based on scripting, which is difficult or impossible for the user agent to > determine from markup. Maybe the term non-interactive needs to defined in > terms of "recognized through markup". I think the document is already sufficient on this front. 1) The definition states: "A non-interactive element is an element that, by specification, does not have associated behaviors." It is thus only by virtue of specification (whether markup language or style sheets) that something would be considered interactive or non-interactive. 2) The applicability provision is always in force anyway. So if not recognized, it doesn't apply. _ Ian -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2001 22:00:22 UTC