Hi Richard,
"For such scripts it is likely to be better to give
the control to the author when identifying the character to highlight."
Thanks for the comment. We agree with you, and think the current text
covers this case exactly:
"We recommend that authors include the access key character in label text
or wherever
the access key is to apply."
The other case is only for when a UA *can* do something itself. In your
example it probably can't, and so the above recommendation applies.
Are you happy with this?
Best wishes,
Steven Pemberton
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:13:27 +0200, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Comment from the i18n review of:
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526/
Comment 4
At
http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0806-xhtml-access/Overview.html
Editorial/substantive: S
Tracked by: RI
Location in reviewed document:
3.1.2
[http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526/#sec_3.1.2.]
Comment:
"The rendering of access keys depends on the user agent. We recommend
that authors include the access key character in label text or wherever
the access key is to apply. If the user agent can recognize that the
currently mapped access key character appears in the label text of the
element to which it is mapped, then the user agent may render the
character in such a way as to emphasize its role as the access key and
distinguish it from other characters (e.g., by underlining it)."
This is likely to be problematic for non-Western text. For example, in
scripts that combine character into complex shapes (such as
Hindi/Devanagari or Urdu/Nastaliq) it can be difficult to isolate a
specific character. For such scripts it is likely to be better to give
the control to the author when identifying the character to highlight.
In some cases the author may include the access key in parentheses after
the label, in others they may prefer to highlight a letter in the label
itself.
