- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:28:47 +0200
- To: www-svg@w3.org
I think, typically authors and users do not really need/want a relation between an element animate/animation and a begin/end event with a label. Often it is a more complex situation, especially if other animations are syncronised to the interactively started animation. What could indeed help is something like a XHTML definition list within metadata using RDF triples to indicate the relation on a more abstract level. If we have for example a group of elements representing an initially sleeping cat, this complete group can include different animations to wake the cat with some interactivity and maybe in different ways. The main issue is about the cat and how to awake it or to get it sleepy again, not necessarily about a single animation. A formal and computer understandable relation indication is relevant, if as mentioned the viewer needs to replace for example accessKeys or events in general, because not all are avialable. Obviously this has to be done both in the description/label and within the begin/end list item consistently. To do this, one has either to use such a combination of elements from another language with a richer structure for text like XHTML in combination with something like RDF triples to indicate the relation or there has to be a new SVG-animation-accessibility group of list like elements to indicate such relations. Of course, with the second option the probability of implementation is higher, because it can be specified more specific for the intended purpose and it is much easier to specify how to interpret this by a viewer. If a 'text only' viewer without graphical capabilties or a general viewer to generate an alternative text view extracts title, desc, metadata and other text containing elements, a solution with multiple title elements would be pretty confusing, because typically in a text representation something has only one title (maybe an additional subtitle), and this indicates, what it is about, not how to use it, especially for a text representation it is not very useful to get a title on how to start an animation, if the viewer does not show the animation at all, it is more relevant to get some information, what the animation represents. Therefore tooltip like information like a label is better noted in desc, or if more structure is required in metadata, and for the example with the cat it is better noted as a direct child of the group representing the complete cat as within a single animate element. This is relevant too, because for some practical reasons (rendering order etc) the animation elements are maybe in different places in the source code or within a defs element. This is not relevant for a specific accessKey solution, but for a more general approach for interactivity. This allows an author to provide a compact descriptive structure for the cat group and maybe another for another group representing a mouse or a dog (animation begin/end within these groups may trigger some activities for the cat as well and vice versa). Sometimes (often), for better usability and understandability it might be a good idea to provide those event lists in a specific order, the author has to do this, because the author has the capabilities to understand the intended purpose. The viewer cannot do this automatically having only labels related only to begin/end list items or single animation elements. Olaf
Received on Monday, 22 June 2009 09:41:10 UTC