W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-canvas-api@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Updated proposal round two (based on feedback from Monday's meeting)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:03:01 +0000 (UTC)
To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002172101280.7572@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Steven Faulkner wrote:
> > 
> >That makes sense, except I don't understand why we would ever want to 
> >turn that behaviour _off_.
> if there is focusable content in the canvas sub tree that is fallback, 
> why would you want it to be tabbable when the canvas is rendered?

The same reason as when it's an "accessible DOM" -- to expose it to AT 

(If the author doesn't want this behaviour, it's trivial to empty the 
<canvas> of the fallback DOM from script after detecting canvas support.)

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 21:04:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:49 UTC