- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@topologi.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 17:45:02 +1000
- To: "WAI Cross-group list" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org> > I think pragmatically we should recognise that a lot of XML is probably > created automatically from instance data, used internally to a small > orgainsation, and that's it. A lot in volume, certainly. But XML identifiers are also used, for example, in IDs, XPaths, Xpointers, Xlinks, XQueries, XSLT, CSS and programming languages. So it is not just accessability for document readers, but also for people writing programs and scripts and making links. (X)HTML will (ultimately) adopt whatever rules XML uses, so this effects what can be used in a fragment reference in an HTML href as well. That may be another way to think about it: what characters are unsuitable for anchor names in HTML. Because linking to anchor points in an HTML document is clearly something that is very empowering about HTML, use of inappropriate characters there will reduce accessibility. I think the point is that, for accessibility, an identifier needs to be text and not graphics. Hence dingbats and music symbols and maths symbols are counter-productive in identifiers. Cheers Rick Jellife
Received on Friday, 5 July 2002 03:31:56 UTC