- From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 15:25:18 -0400
- To: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>, mimasa@w3.org
- CC: www-html-editor@w3.org, WAI Cross-group list <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Steven, Masayasu, In preparation for the TAG's face-to-face meeting next week, I read the 13 Sep 2002 HLink spec [1]. I have some comments about functionalities, derived from UAAG 1.0 [2], that I think should be part of HLink. I am cc'ing the public wai-xtech list as well. Thank you for considering these comments, - Ian [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-hlink-20020913/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-UAAG10-20020821/ ============================================================== 1) effect attribute, value 'new' UAAG 1.0, checkpoint 5.3 states: 1. Allow configuration so that viewports only open on explicit user request. HLink should require a conforming HLink user agent to satisfy this checkpoint for the 'new' value. 2) effect attribute, value 'submit' UAAG 1.0, checkpoint 5.5 states: 1. Allow configuration to prompt the user to confirm (or cancel) any form submission. HLink should require a conforming HLink user agent to satisfy this checkpoint for the 'embed' value. 3) actuate attribute, value 'onRequest' HLink states: "Actuation is done by the user using the primary actuation method or by a method (such as scripting) imitating this behavior." Some of the requirements of UAAG 1.0 involve configuration to turn automatic behavior (that may disorient or be unusable by some users with disabilities) into manual behavior. Markup should make it easier for the user agent to distinguish what is really an explicit user request and what is an imitation. Therefore, I think that there should be two attributes, to distinguish the case of "real user input" from "imitations". The same comment goes for onRequestSecondary. 4) actuate attribute, value 'onRequestSecondary' If one can only imagine markup language semantics where at most two elements are competing for input events, this might be sufficient. But is it an unnecessary constraint? Instead, I think that the author should be able to provide a text title and description of each behavior (by default "Activate"). When there is ambiguity about which element should get an input event, the user agent should offer to the user the choice of actions. 5) Missing attributes for accessibility. It seems like a few attributes that benefit accessibility are missing: title, accesskey, and tabindex. Is there any intention of associating a navigation model with HLink elements? UAAG 1.0's navigation assumptions are based on enabled elements. I mentioned some navigation stop ideas in a recent mail about XAG 1.0 [3], in particular the ability of the author to: - Identify groups of related links (so UAs can allow users to skip over them). This may be related to the 'map' attribute, in HLink, but I don't yet understand that attribute's semantics enough. - Identify stops in the sequential navigation order, and links to skip over. - Identify elements with navigable substructures. - Define a default input binding for activation (like accesskey). - Define a sequential navigation order (like tabindex). [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2002Sep/0028 5) mediaType attribute (not accessibility-related) Should this attribute be advisory only. Doesn't the definitive word about media type come from the protocol? -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 718 260-9447
Received on Friday, 20 September 2002 15:29:34 UTC