- From: Michael Hamm <msh210@is7.nyu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 14:37:17 -0500 (EST)
- To: Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>
- cc: www-html@w3.org
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Murray Altheim wrote, in part: > > So it would seem from the Spec ("Pressing an access key assigned to an > > element gives focus to the element."[3]), but I see no reason that that > > should be so. Why shouldn't a <link>, even if not displayed, have an > > accesskey? > > You allude to the problem. Noting that <link> may be used for various > features, some of which have no user interaction at all, what exactly > would the accesskey being pressed *do*? If it's not intuitive it's > unlikely that we'd want to suggest it. > > Unless there is an intuitive association between a link element and > an intended behaviour, adding an accesskey is going to introduce more > problems than it solves. And one must note that there are many kinds > of links;, not all involve user interaction. Every <link> tag has an href attribute. (It's implied, yes, but, still, every <link> tag has an href attribute.) It would seem intuitive to use accesskey as thought the <link> tag were an <a> tag, no? That would be useful for every link type listed in http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.12 except Stylesheet. Fourteen out of fifteen ain't bad, eh? The only other thing I can envision using <link> for (which is already in the Spec) is as an alternative to <head profile="foo">. For that, too, hyperlinking to it would not make much sense, somake it 14 out of 16. :-) Michael Hamm BA, Math, Sept. '00 msh210@nyu.edu http://www.crosswinds.net/~msh210/
Received on Monday, 27 December 1999 14:37:19 UTC