- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 14:19:04 +0100
- To: "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>, wai-xtech@w3.org
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 00:52:37 +0100, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 06:12:34PM +0100, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >> >> On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:59:50 +0100, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org> >> >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. > I concur with Charles. This is a stylistic preference on the author's > part and > should be considered analogous to other presentational characteristics > that > can be specified in styles. The only difference, a minor one, is that it > concerns input rather than output. > In that sense John F is right that this is part of the behaviour layer, and in a clean design probably belongs there - part of XML events, not part of XHTML. But pragmatically I think that not breaking existing marup is generally better than breaking it. Opera doesn't plan on rendering the old web obsolete, much as we strongly encourage authors to stop making silly mistakes like using tools that can't produce valid code. There is no practical reason we can see to change the existing markup, unless there is a much more significant overhaul of the Web, something that is likely to take a couple of decades (and is therefore beyond the scope of W3C itself) Cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Sunday, 20 November 2005 13:19:15 UTC