- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 20:59:01 -0500 (EST)
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- cc: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, <rayw@netscape.com>, <plh@w3.org>, <lehors@us.ibm.com>, <shane@aptest.com>, <gleng@freedomscientific.com>, <jongund@uiuc.edu>, <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Al Gilman wrote: At 12:40 PM 2002-01-04 , Ian B. Jacobs wrote: [big snip] > >Please indicate what other questions WAI or the DOM WG or the >HTML WG should answer. Al Here are some of the related questions that appear to bear on the support for events in future versions of the DOM and XML-based languages (a.k.a. dialects, modules, ...) and accessibility consequences of those features: Q1.x Given the capabilities/constraints of current formats, what information is available which would be useful to users in making an informed decision as to activating or not activating a behavior which the author has set to be triggered by a device-specific event? An adaptive rebinding is required either when the UI adaptation of the user does not generate that event or does not allow the un-confirmed automatic activation of the event handler for some reason. How would the available information be processed in a representative adaptive interface binding (or bindings). Some of this is guesswork or "repair text." What are the options there, and the tradeoffs? CMN I don't see how, in the case where a user agent setup means that an event must be confirmed, it affects us. The event is either triggered or not, and i it is there is a confirmation interaction required, and if it is not then it is the simple case of a user agent configuration taht doesn't naturally fire that event. So I think we could simplify the cases in the question to "where the user agent configuration does not generate that event". Cheers Charles
Received on Saturday, 5 January 2002 20:59:10 UTC