- From: Jon Ferraiolo <jon.ferraiolo@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 13:10:07 -0700
- To: Dean Jackson <dino@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Ola Andersson <Ola.Andersson@ikivo.com>, www-svg@w3.org
Hi Dean and Bjoern, I agree with your responses. As I remember, the SVG WG didn't really care very much about the markup used for navigation options. There is a good chance that if there is consensus feedback from the W3C community, then the SVG WG will go along with that consensus without resistance. In terms of why the SVG-t 1.2 LC uses directional navigation syntax that is different than CSS3, I believe there were two markup approaches already in W3C specs: the CSS3 UI markup (nav-* properties) and the XHTML2 markup (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-hyperAttributes.html#s_hyperAttributesmodule). The XHTML2 markup included a processing model description which looked like a good foundation from which to build and offered some minor simplifications versus the CSS3 appraoch. I am not sure, but I believe that the SVG WG decided it preferred the XHTML2 approach and subsequently decided to build its 8-way directional navigation facilities to integrate well with nextfocus/prevfocus. In other words, the first-order decision was whether to use CSS3 syntax ('nav-index') or XHTML2 syntax (nextfocus/prevfocus) for "tab navigation", and then the second-order decision is whether to make directional navigation syntax compatible with the chosen "tab navigation" syntax. Jon At 08:08 AM 5/23/2005, Dean Jackson wrote: >On 23/05/2005, at 7:14 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > >> >>* Ola Andersson wrote: >> >>>> In http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20050413/ svgudom.html the >>>>definition of the moveFocus operations refers to nav-* >>>>properties, no >>>>such properties are defined in the draft, please change the draft >>>>such >>>>that it refers to something it actually defines. >> >> >>>nav-* properties have been replaced by focus*. >> >>This does not satisfy me. I think rather than inventing new mechanisms >>the SVG Working Group should coordinate with the CSS WG to satisfy the >>dependencies noted in http://www.w3.org/2004/10/svg-charter and if >>that >>fails, note that in the Last Call Announcement as required by the >>Process document. > >We replaced nav-* with focus* after feedback from the WAI >domain. > >Personally, I'm ok with either solution. However, we need >8-way navigation, not 4-way as CSS3-UI provides. Assuming that >CSS WG would accept an enhancement to this feature then I >think nav-* is acceptable. What do you think? > >You don't really need to answer the following questions. In >fact I'd prefer it if you didn't :) I'm much more interested >in your feedback on the proposal. > >>Could you please point me to the SVG WG comment on css3-ui on why the >>reference had to be removed from SVG 1.2? > >Sorry, I don't understand. You think that in order to remove a >reference to a specification we were not using we have to >send a comment on that specification? > >>Are there positive review >>comments from the CDF Working Group that they support conflicting >>navigation order mechanisms in e.g. a XHTML+SVG document type? > >Do you mean positive review comments on SVG Tiny, or just >positive comments in general? > > >>Does >>SVG 1.2 "Full" still use the nav-* properties? > >No. > >>If so, how are conflicts >>resolved between the two mechanisms? > >No conflicts. > >Dean > >
Received on Monday, 23 May 2005 20:21:27 UTC