Re: @key on xhtml2:access still a hot topic

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:59:50 +0100, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>  
wrote:

> ** functional requirements:
>
> Should authors be suggesting key bindings for accelerated functions
> in their Web Aps?

Yes. It provides a hint that we (implementors) can use in the absence of  
better information. John is right taht conflict reolution and final  
assignment belong to the user agent, and thus so does the requirement to  
advertise what actual interaction bindings are available.

> ** design details:
>
> In the emerging XHTML2 generation of technologies, EMMA, sXBL, etc,
> is there a 'right way' that this could have been done but it's missing
> in the available toolkit at this time?

Combining role (required?) with a binding hint (optional) annd the  
language we should have got into the SMIL 2 and 2.1 specs...

> Is there a better migration path through existing technology ( such
> as script ) that affords as good accessibility results without a detour
> into a potentially "deprecated on introduction" placeholder feature?

There is no reason we need to change the markup, except to add role. We  
need to change the specification of what user agents do, and fix all the  
broken IE/Mozilla/etc implementations that use alt+ as an accesskey  
mechanism, since that creates massive numbers of conflicts. For existing  
implementations, Gez Lemons wrote a neat script. It's not that hard to  
make a user script for any given configuration. But it's better to change  
the mechanism at the same time to something that provides more  
possiblities.

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile                      Fundacion Sidar
charles@sidar.org   +61 409 134 136    http://www.sidar.org

Received on Saturday, 19 November 2005 17:13:23 UTC