- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:19:11 -0600
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- CC: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, W3C HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>
The access element in XHTML Access Module [1] is not a key navigation element - it is a method for defining an abstract mapping from events to event handlers[2]. One such event might be a key press. The XHTML Access Module has been under development for ages, and that name was specifically chosen by the PFWG. I personally would be loathe to attempt to change it at this point - in particular since it is specifically mentioned in the XHTML 2 Working Group charter [3]. [1] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#xhtml-access [2] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#xml-events2 [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/03/XHTML2-WG-charter Doug Schepers wrote: > Hi, WebApps WG and XHTML2 WG- > > There is a potential conflict between the <access> element defined in > the Widgets 1.0: Packaging and Configuration specification [1] and the > <access> element defined in the XHTML Access Module specification [2] > (most recent draft also available [3]). > > It may be that both are never used in the same document; <widget:access> > is intended for use in a configuration document, while <access:access> > is intended for (X)HTML/SVG documents. However, both elements are > rather loosely named, and not immediately clear in intent. > > I propose that both specs change the name of their element. A better > name for Widgets might be <securityModel> or something, and for the > Access spec, a better name might be <keyNav>. > > Thoughts? > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#the-access-element > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-access/#sec_3.1. > [3] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20081023/ > > Regards- > -Doug Schepers > W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Friday, 20 February 2009 02:19:50 UTC