- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:20:44 -0500 (EST)
- To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
- cc: WAI Cross-group list <wai-xtech@w3.org>
The accessibility requirement is that there are accessibility needs to be able to set up a different plugin that go beyond "I would prefer to use software X". I agree that this is a general user problem as well. I can also see why people would imagine specifying a particular plugin program is what they want to do, and something stronger than just "be nice to users" is always helpful. Cheers Chaals On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Ian B. Jacobs wrote: Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > Issue: the object element can poiint to a plugin application instead of > allowing the user to choose the most useful one. [snip] > For example, there is a classid for the Adobe SVG plugin, and this is what > gets specified. If a user has an accessibility need for a different plugin > (for example a talking plugin), as I understand it they are unable to use > that instead without major poking about in the systems innards. > A similar requirement we considered (but rejected) was "The UA must hand off focus to ATs." This is certainly true, but not strictly an accessibility requirement; it affects anyone who wants to use a plugin. This seems more appropriate for /TR/CX or Common User Agent Problems, and as you say, format specifications or XAG. _ Ian -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2002 16:20:44 UTC