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

Re: canvas API changes to drive magnification

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 10:34:20 -0600
To: David Bolter <david.bolter@gmail.com>
Cc: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, cooper@w3.org, cyns@exchange.microsoft.com, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Frank Olivier <franko@microsoft.com>, janina@rednote.net, jcraig@apple.com, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFD3DFC188.D59C2F65-ON862576E1.005AC661-862576E1.005B08BB@us.ibm.com>

Hi David,

I don't understand the correlation to usemap? Why would it be any
different. Usemap would be an alternative techique for creating a shadow
DOM. Either way you have the same drawing and accessible object binding
problem.

Rich

Rich Schwerdtfeger
Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist


                                                                           
             David Bolter                                                  
             <david.bolter@gma                                             
             il.com>                                                    To 
                                       Richard                             
             03/09/2010 10:00          Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS      
             AM                                                         cc 
                                       Charles McCathieNevile              
                                       <chaals@opera.com>, cooper@w3.org,  
                                       cyns@exchange.microsoft.com, Steven 
                                       Faulkner                            
                                       <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Frank   
                                       Olivier <franko@microsoft.com>,     
                                       janina@rednote.net,                 
                                       jcraig@apple.com,                   
                                       "public-canvas-api@w3.org"          
                                       <public-canvas-api@w3.org>          
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: canvas API changes to drive     
                                       magnification                       
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Hi Rich,

I don't know if I am against the canDrawCustom attribute, I just want to
understand it better. Perhaps it is useful for interop with the usemap
approach?

cheers,
David
On 09/03/10 9:56 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> David,
>
> Good pickup. I believe the author should be responsible for drawing the
> caret. The canDrawCustom argument is left over from Hixie's proposal and
I
> agree that is a bit confusing. I have not seen a convention whereby the
> system draws the caret - has anyone else? I left it in. Do you think it
is
> possible for the browser to draw a default caret?  I can see a focus ring
> being doable but for caret I have my doubts.
>
> Rich
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
>
>
>               David Bolter
>               <david.bolter@gma
>               il.com>
To
>                                         Richard
>               03/09/2010 08:34          Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
>               AM
cc
>                                         cooper@w3.org,
janina@rednote.net,
>                                         Charles McCathieNevile
>                                         <chaals@opera.com>,
>                                         cyns@exchange.microsoft.com,
Steven
>                                         Faulkner
>                                         <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Frank
>                                         Olivier<franko@microsoft.com>,
>                                         jcraig@apple.com,
>                                         "public-canvas-api@w3.org"
>                                         <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
>
Subject
>                                         Re: canvas API changes to drive
>                                         magnification
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Rich, all,
>
> I just read the proposal at
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility,
>
> I don't feel like I fully understand the proposal. Take the case for
canvas
> drawn text. Each time the user presses the right arrow, does the author
> catch that event and call e.g. drawFocusRing(myTextBox, 10, 5, true,
true)?
>
> I want to understand who is responsible for drawing the caret or focus
ring
> in various examples.
>
> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/canvas/2dcontext-caret.html is
> really hard to understand (maybe because of typos). For example I don't
> understand how to parse this sentence: " If the given element is focused
or
> is a descendant of the focus element, and isCaret is true, canDrawCustom
> argument is true draws a caret following the platform conventions for
> carets." -- Who draws?
>
> cheers,
> David
>
> On 08/03/10 7:17 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
>
>
>        I would like to have people review Steve and my proposal to the
>        canvas
>        accessibility API to address focus and caret tracking for the next
>        canvas
>        meeting on the 15th so that we can take this to the task force for
>        approval. David, Frank, Cynthia, James, and Charles I would very
much
>        like
>        your feedback by the next call.
>
>        http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility
>
>        Thanks,
>        Rich
>
>        Rich Schwerdtfeger
>        Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
>
>






graycol.gif
(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

pic16807.gif
(image/gif attachment: pic16807.gif)

ecblank.gif
(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 16:35:02 UTC

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