Fwd: PFWG comments on View Mode Media Feature

Hi Michael,

During the widget group's May 20 call, we discussed your comment [1]  
and agreed the use of "tactile" was an accidental oversight and as  
such, we resolved to remove it from the spec:

  http://www.w3.org/2010/05/20-wam-minutes.html#item07

For the purposes of closing the LC comment loop, please reply to  
Robin's e-mail and indicate if you are satisfied (or not) with the  
group's decision to remove "tactile".

-Thanks, Art Barstow

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/ 
0771.html


Begin forwarded message:

> From: ext Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
> Date: May 20, 2010 9:51:59 AM EDT
> To: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
> Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, List WAI  
> Liaison <wai-liaison@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: PFWG comments on View Mode Media Feature
> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/21946992-D5BE-4393-A1D7- 
> D47542CA2EBE@berjon.com>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> thanks a lot for your review!
>
> On May 19, 2010, at 18:32 , Michael Cooper wrote:
>> The Last Call draft of the View Mode Media Feature states that it
>> "Applies to: visual and tactile media types"
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-view-mode-20100420/#the--view-mode-- 
>> media-feature
>>
>> While these view modes make sense for visual media types, they don't
>> seem appropriate for the two tactile media types "braille" and
>> "embossed", as defined in "Cascading Style Sheets Level 2 Revision 1
>> (CSS 2.1) Specification". in Section 7.3 "Recognized media types"
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/media.html#media-types
>
> Good catch. Listing "tactile" was unintended, it probably happened  
> by copying over from an existing media query description. This MF  
> indeed makes sense only for visual media. We have removed it from  
> our internal draft.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- 
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
>
>
>
>