Re: aria-dialog and html5 element dialogue (a proposal)

I'm not the public-html list, but feel free to take the discussion  
there and post to bugzilla if you think it's necessary. If I were you,  
I'd file your "dialog needs to be spelled* dialogue" crusade as a  
separate issue, because I'd have to vote that one down, too. ;-)

For those of you on XTech that didn't see the beginning of this topic,  
check these two emails:
http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/help-whatwg.org/2008-November/000151.html
http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/help-whatwg.org/2008-November/000152.html

Cheers,
James

* or should I say, "spelt"

On Nov 26, 2008, at 5:37 PM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:

> aloha, james!
>
> if hixie is amenable to a change in the element's name, then by all
> means, that is the best solution...  i have proposed a universal
> stroke global @role attribute for HTML5, so i would be in favor of
> using @role to distinguish types of dialog, but with the caveat and
> foreknowledge that the element name be semantically meaningful and
> easily understood by those for whom english is not their first
> language...  so, i would nominate "dialogue" as the element name,
> for that is actually the preferred spelling of the term when
> applied to multiple speakers in 4 of the 5 online thesauri i
> checked, so DIALOGUE as an HTML5 element name would make the most
> sense (and for those who cry "bloat", it is only 2 characters)
>
> the next step is to provide a list of pre-defined roles for DIALOGUE:
>
> "conversation"
> "transcript"
> "dialogue" (yes, @dialogue -- what else is one to call it when it  
> applies
> equally to theater, film, works of fiction, and so on)
>
> and what else?  james, have you entered this into the W3C HTML5
> bugzilla (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/bugzilla) -- should i?  it would
> be good to log the "issue" and then allow people to add predefined
> role values in the bugzilla log -- is this the way that the PFWG can
> accelerate and contribute "positively" to HTML5?  (this is as much
> of a question to the individual PF WG members and to the chairs as
> it is rhetorical)
>
> lastly, and NOT tangentally, why is this NOT being discussed on
> public-html?  this is an example of the problems inherent in the
> dual tracking of the HTML5 "effort" by the W3C and the WHAT WG --
> this IS and will remain a SERIOUS problem until it is addressed in an
> executive manner at the highest levels...  note that i have posted  
> this
> to a public list -- wai-xtech -- but NOT to public-html as i want to
> take the WG's pulse on this (and the approach i've outlined) before
> taking that step...
>
> gregory.
>
> ---------- Original Message -----------
> From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
> To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>
> Cc: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, pstradomski@gmail.com
> Sent: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:50:59 -0800
> Subject: Re: aria-dialog versus HTML5 DIALOG element
>
>> Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
>>
>>> so, both aria-dialog and HTML5's DIALOG element are needed and
>>> necessary, but both are intended for entirely different audiences  
>>> and
>>> it is by contextualizing the use of aria-dialog that such confusion
>>> will be avoided...
>>
>> I just want to minimize confusion between the two if it can be
>> avoided. Ian is open to a name change if a better one exists. I
>> suggested 'transcript' or just a simple 'dl' with an
>> differentiating  attribute.
>>
>> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/help-whatwg.org/2008-November/000152.html
> ------- End of Original Message -------
>

Received on Thursday, 27 November 2008 02:32:03 UTC