- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 10:47:43 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-wai-wg@w3.org (WAI Working Group)
to follow up on what Daniel Dardailler said: > > An issue has come up in the HTML WG and I'd like to get > your input. > > The OBJECT tag, which embeds multimedia in HTML (Java, ActiveX, > ShockWave, etc, or plain IMG), has recently lost it's client-side > image map support. > > > How do people feel about that ? > I have two suggestions, which I will call the "product" suggestion and the "process" suggestion. PRODUCT: I think we should follow Murray's advice. We need to explain the accessibility scenario where we thought we wanted a USEMAP on OBJECT so they can grasp the accessibility issue. What we really need is the capability for more general conditional document content than a simple text string. We want at least a conditional hyperlink. If they come back and give us an IF-THEN-ELSE control-flow structure where you can have an arbitrary DIV in each branch, we will have enough capability to do better than what we said we wanted to do. We should do our best to explain the capability required and explain that USEMAP on OBJECT was the only example we knew about where the required capability was in Cougar. PROCESS: I want the W3C to demonstrate that they are prepared to hold the HTML WG accountable for what they do to the accessibility interest. That is to say, if HTML WG want to remove something that we said we want, they have to furnish some justification for why they want to eliminate it, and negotiate with us. A W3C process where WAI proposes and HTML disposes is simply not acceptable. I think the next step is to let the HTML coordination group know that there is a problem. The HTML WG has eliminated something that the WAI WG was counting on. We should put this on the agenda for 12 or 13 November, and get someone who understands the motivation to eliminate it designated to join the w3c-wai-wg mailing list to discuss options with us. I don't think that we should modify what we are asking for until they demonstrate that they are listening. -- Al Gilman
Received on Friday, 8 August 1997 10:48:20 UTC