RE: keybind and softkeytype [Fwd: Requests to HTML4.0 draft]

At 12:49 AM -0400 8/22/97, Jordan Reiter wrote:
>I agree.  Frankly, I don't see why either of these *have* to be in the
>specs.  Companies use proprietary extensions all the time.  Netscape, for
>example, has a MULTICOL element which isn't in the HTML 4.0 specs.  So
>what?  If they're that insistent that it be part of some sort of recognized
>standardized do-hickey, then they can just wait until XML is widely
>implemented.  I think that special elements/attributes for different
>interfaces shouldn't be required to put into the specs, and that XML
>probably covers this.

Well, I never really said that I was in favor of adding them to the spec,
with the exception of the softkeytype attribute, and even then I don't
think it has to be the current draft.

As a matter of fact, I think it would be easier (in the case of the
accesskey/keybind attribute and if both function the same) to have the
manufactuerer of the devices simply issue an update to their software that
modifies the software to use accesskey instead of keybind, and make the
update available to the end-user via the web (and ftp).

my .02

Wayne

               Nick: TWayne or Wayne or WayneC
              Email: mailto:twaynec@pacbell.net
          Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/6088/
VU Study Group Site: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/8231/

Received on Friday, 22 August 1997 15:02:01 UTC