- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 11:08:44 -0400
- To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/nov/01/apple-samsung-statement To some degree this is just about the wording of Apple's statement, but it also relates to a legal question of whether publishing something in a way that requires (in a typical user agent) clicking on a link has the same impact as publishing in some more visible way. I'm only half-convinced this is pertinent to the TAG's work, but am passing it on just in case: Argument pro: you could make the case that the <a href> is just a piece of mechanism, and different user agents might or might not require certain user activity to see the text to which it links. That's a subtlety a court might or might not notice. Wget, for example, might load the linked warning with essentially no extra effort on the user's part (though wget, of course, doesn't directly present anything to users). Argument con: in practice, most desktop user agents (browsers) handle this the same way, and indeed link text rendered in small type is easy to miss and requiring a click is very different than just including or transcluding text. Anyway, that's the link if anyone is interested. Noah
Received on Thursday, 1 November 2012 15:09:13 UTC