Implied essentiality levels of some @action values
matatk opened this issue · 6 comments
I had some questions about the implied level of essentiality of some of the action attribute values:
deleteisn't implicitly critical (but I expected it to be); do we know why? I know there is a note in the spec about the "delete" function being not necessarily essential for some tasks, so maybe that's why, but it seems quite context-dependant.escapefeels like it should be implicitly critical too, but isn't; do we know why?- I note we have a
cancelaction too, which is marked as critical;cancelis specified as relating entirely to dialogs. I wonder if it's a subset ofescape?
- I note we have a
This maybe relates to (but is a separate/more specific question than) #66
charles is adding to escape fro clarification . see mintes for 24/5/2001
other issues are agreeed
Currently we have the following in our list of values in section 3.1.4 of the Content Module 1
| cancel | Closes the dialog and discards any changes the user may have made within that dialog. (Implied simplification = "critical".) |
|---|
| escape | Typically used to abort, cancel or change what is currently being displayed on the screen. A common application of the the esc key is to leave full screen mode. |
|---|
I propose the following for both cancel and escape
| cancel | Closes the dialog and discards any changes the user may have made within that dialog. (Implied simplification = "critical", the reason being if there is no escape option cancel must be present to abort the operation) |
|---|
| escape | Typically used to abort, cancel or change what is currently being displayed on the screen. A common application of the the esc key is to leave full screen mode. (implied simplification = "critical", the reason being if there is no cancel option escape must be present to abort the operation) |
|---|
I am fine if we don't feel we also need to justify cancel as requiring critical simplification and leave its definition alone and only update escape.
Just a quick note that we also discussed this on the group call: https://www.w3.org/2021/05/24-personalization-minutes.html
Having re-read the minutes, I think we agreed to go with @clapierre's second option and revised wording. We also note @lseeman's point that we must be considering what's absolutely critical from the user's perspective.
Just a further note that the discussion in the minutes seems to start at https://www.w3.org/2021/05/24-personalization-minutes.html#x103
Close per Issue #194