- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 14:41:52 -0700
- To: Doug Dominiak <doug.dominiak@openwave.com>, Jon Gunderson <jongund@uiuc.edu>, Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- CC: WAI Cross-group list <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML WG <w3c-html-wg@w3.org>
I actually agree precisely with the example of mobile devices that Doug presents and his reasoning. To that extent, I think it should not only be hyperlinks that have the "activate immediate" behavior on mobile devices. Buttons for example (<button>, <input type="button|submit|reset|radio|checkbox">) should also have that behavior. This will help with consistency for those UAs. I still think that for other interactive user agents (e.g. desktops, laptops, TVs), the "focus immediately" behavior is strongly preferred, and thus should be the default. I believe that the right thing to do is to add an exception clause to HTML4 for when rendering to a 'handheld' medium. E.g. "When presenting an HTML document to a mobile device (e.g. media='handheld'), typing an accesskey should focus _and_ activate the respective element, e.g. hyperlinks should be activated and navigated, and buttons should also be similarly activated." By tying this difference in behavior _precisely_ to the 'media' attribute/concept, it provides authors a single place to make distinctions regarding presentation and behavior when designing the interaction for various different media. It also provides clear guidance to user agent implementers. Thanks, Tantek On 10/1/02 1:46 PM, "Doug Dominiak" <doug.dominiak@openwave.com> wrote: > I would like to present the view of the mobile browser community and > say that we very much require the "activate immediately" behavior of > access keys as they relate to hyperlinks. With the usability of current > interfaces somewhat strained, every keystroke by the end user matters. > Movement of focus with the first keystroke followed by activation of > the link by the second is just not acceptable. > > The notion of allowing duplicate access key bindings is an interesting > one, though not at all compelling for the mobile browser space. I > don't think it motivates the "focus immediately approach", though I > appreciate Tantek's other 4 reasons. > > I feel strongly that "focus immediately" behavior of access key applied > to hyperlinks in mobile browsers in unacceptable and would not be > implemented, so I would like to see a solution that would avoid divergence. > > Thanks for your consideration. > > Regards, > Doug Dominiak > Openwave Systems > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tantek Çelik" <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> > To: "Jon Gunderson" <jongund@uiuc.edu>; "Charles McCathieNevile" > <charles@w3.org> > Cc: "WAI Cross-group list" <wai-xtech@w3.org>; "HTML WG" <w3c-html-wg@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:42 AM > Subject: Re: activation / focus and users Re: Access Key > > >> >> It appears that we are talking about two different (but at times >> overlapping) communities of users. >> >> (1) Accessibility >> (2) Power Users >> >> I believe that while serving (1) very often indirectly serves (2) as well, >> (1) should take priority over (2) when conflicts arise, or when designing >> "default behaviors". >> >> I would assert that Charles' use of his "own case" and reference to >> efficiency places his example in (2). >> >> While I certainly understand the plea for efficiency, is there really that >> much difference in efficiency between: >> >> a) type accesskey (with modifier) >> b) type accesskey (with modifier) and press return >> >> ? >> >> As far as overuse of hands, consider that typical typist convention is to >> use the right pinky finger to press the return key, and the right pinky >> finger is one of the least used from a frequency of keypresses standpoint. >> >> I concur with Jon Gunderson's point about sequentially moving the focus >> among form controls/links with the same accesskey.[2] >> >> >> As far as changing implementations, this is specifically why I raised this >> issue as a necessary clarification to HTML4.[2] >> >> In IE5/Mac we implemented the "activate immediately" behavior of accesskey >> on hyperlinks based upon literal reading of the informative example(s) in >> HTML4. >> >> Given experience and understanding since, I think this was a mistake. >> >> >> I want to change this in our next major release to "focus immediately" >> behavior which will have the following advantages (raised by the >> participants in this discussion): >> >> a) consistent behavior between IE/Mac and IE/Windows (authors like that) >> b) consistent behavior among elements (users like that) >> c) ability to gracefully handle duplicate accesskeys by rotating focus >> d) ability to have focus event handlers actually do something on links >> e) increased safety by reducing the chance of accidental link activation >> >> The only argument/advantage that I have seen/heard for the "activate >> immediately" behavior is: >> >> a) greater efficiency >> >> Which I believe is not that much anyway, as explained above. >> >> The specific errata to HTML4 that I proposed to fix this is documented in >> [2]. >> >> If there is sufficient direction of opinion on this issue, would it be >> possible to achieve a consensus so I that I may move forward with making >> this change in our implementation in concert with that consensus? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Tantek >> >> [2] >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2002JulSep/0549.html >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Tantek Çelik tantek@cs.stanford.edu >> Tasman Development Lead, Microsoft Corporation tantekc@microsoft.com >> Representative to W3C CSS and HTML working groups >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> On 10/1/02 8:49 AM, "Jon Gunderson" <jongund@uiuc.edu> wrote: >> >>> >>> The other advantage of only moving focus is that if the same accesskey is >>> used multiple times on a page focus can move sequentially between the form >>> controls or links. >>> >>> The HTML spec [1] seems to indicate that links should be automatically >>> activated. But the two implementations of accesskey Internet Explorer 5.0+ >>> and Netscape Navigator 6.0+ differ on their interpretation. IE only moves >>> focus and NN moves focus and activates the link. Each technique has its >>> own advantages and disadvantages, but I think it would be better for the >>> user if browsers were consistent, and therefore the feature more >>> predictable for end users. But I guess this is a mute point since IE and >>> NN both do something different. I doubt either will change their >>> implementation. >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/forms.html#adef-accesskey >>> >>> At 11:27 AM 10/1/2002 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >>>> What kind of users are we talking about here? >>>> >>>> It seems there is a consensus that there are some users for whom the focus >>>> then activate sequence is an important safety feature - people using >>>> primarily voice interaction, who may not remember all the access keys, >>>> people >>>> who are likely to bounce on keys by accident. >>>> >>>> My own case is different - I have a problem with overuse of my hands, but I >>>> can (normally) see a lot of information presented visually and it is rare >>>> that I hit the wrong key, or am surprised by what happened if I did. I >>>> believe there are a number of people in related situations (I know a >>>> handful >>>> personally) who appreciate the efficiency of the direct activation method >>>> above all. >>>> >>>> I presume there are people who are somewhere between the two - in some >>>> circumstances they appreciate the efficiency, but in other cases they want >>>> to >>>> use the safety feature. (This is also relevant to Jonny's comment about >>>> triggering focus events) >>>> >>>> Can anyone help provide more data about the user scenarios they are >>>> outlining? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Chaals >>>> >>>> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Jon Gunderson wrote (among other things): >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Accesskeys are important for allowing direct navigation to links and form >>>>> controls, especially web based applications that people use on a daily >>>>> basis. When I use accesskeys I always provide built-in documentation to >>>>> what accesskeys are available in addition to the underlining technique of >>>>> the key letter in the link or form label. We have developed a web based >>>>> database to keep track of disability services here at UIUC that uses >>>>> accesskeys and works very effectively to speed navigation for screen >>>>> reader >>>>> users. We have a internal link on each page to a list of the available >>>>> accesskeys on the page[1]. >>>>> >>>>> My criteria for accesskeys: >>>>> 3. I think moving focus is better than automatic activation (the IE rather >>>>> than NN way) >>>>> >>>>> Jon >>>>> >>>>> And at 10:14 PM 9/30/2002 +0200, Jonny Axelsson wrote (among other >>>>> things): >>>>> >>>>>> Here is a collection of my opinions on accesskey. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would agree with Tantek on the effect of triggering an accesskey. >>>> While it >>>>>> is more efficient to do actions with no confirmation, the risk of >>>> triggering >>>>>> an accesskey accidentally, together with the possibility that the >>>> action may >>>>>> be irreversible (like a POST or even a GET under some circumstances, or >>>> some >>>>>> scriptable control), has convinced me that giving the element focus is >>>>>> the >>>>>> best and most predictable alternative. >>>>>> >>>>>> While there are conflicting opinions on whether keyboard navigation >>>>>> should >>>>>> trigger events (navigating using a keyboard would normally traverse all >>>>>> intervening elements on the way to the target, you would not want to >>>> trigger >>>>>> those elements), accesskey should trigger a focus event. It is the >>>>>> keyboard >>>>>> equivalent to point and click (or rather point and mousedown). >>>>>> >>> >>> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP >>> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology >>> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services >>> MC-574 >>> College of Applied Life Studies >>> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign >>> 1207 S. Oak Street, Champaign, IL 61820 >>> >>> Voice: (217) 244-5870 >>> Fax: (217) 333-0248 >>> >>> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu >>> >>> WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund >>> WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua >>> >>> >> >> > > >
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2002 17:30:53 UTC