Hi Jim, your comments reach us right after the WG decided to take the specification to CR, but thankfully I was a bit slow with the editing so that we could take them into account :)
On May 27, 2010, at 22:42 , Jim Allan wrote: > View-mode: fullscreen. It is not clear whether fullscreen includes a full > set of chrome, or includes no chrome. You mention 'chrome' in the > 'windowed' and 'floating' viewmodes. For consistency, chrome presence should > be noted in fullscreen. That's correct, I've now clarified this by adding a mention of chrome for both fullscreen and maximized. > It should be noted that the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 [1] has > success criteria that allow the user to override author settings for a > variety of viewport view-modes including the inclusion/exclusion of > 'chrome.' Yes, and that's fine. The idea here is that the UA would make a best effort at matching the intent in a way that makes sense rather than be ultra strict. For instance, if the app goes fullscreen but keeps a teeny bit of chrome (at user option or not) to make it easier to exit fullscreen, then matching the view-mode: fullscreen media query is quite clearly the right thing to do. > Please consider including a statement such as > "The user agent *must* display the view-modes in a manner that meets the > accessibility guidelines of UAAG20. " As much as I'd like more UAs to support UAAG I don't think that this requirement is appropriate here. The VM specification defines a technology with a single purpose: "if the window in which the content is being rendered is like this, then apply these CSS style rules". It does *not* define how a UA ought to display an actual set of window states, it doesn't in fact even require UAs to support all the view modes. I'd expect that an application running on an iPhone would only support maximized and fullscreen — if it applied different style rules for each, it would still be 100% conformant. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
