On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 05:22:51 -0400, Jim Ley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Anne van Kesteren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xbl-20060619/#eventxbl introduces
EventXBL.trusted...
if it can be suitably defined, then I think it should be on Event
directly
Makes sense to me
if at all, however I have reservations of how it can be defined and
implemented. User agents will need to provide API's for their plugins
that can distinguish between the 2 cases of user and non-user provided
events - an Access Technology must be producing events that are trusted,
or it would hobble AT's.
...
Yes. This doesn't just apply to access technologies - user agents
generally use JS to extend functionality in the browser, and people are
adding both trusted and untrusted extensions., although in the case of
accessibility these are clearly very important, they matter to a lot of
other users too.
One approach would be to leave it open for now how things become trusted,
which means User Agents would start out being conservative, but if authors
made use of this would be under pressure to implement a way for users to
declare various things trustworthy. The risk is that if user agents are
not prepared to do so, a scenario arises where authors rely on things
being trusted anyway, leaving blocs of users and of useful functionality
out in the cold.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Try Opera 9 ASAP! http://opera.com
