W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-canvas-api@w3.org > January to March 2011

Looking at an IME Proposal

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:36:48 -0800
Message-ID: <4D30C1F0.80503@jumis.com>
To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
CC: Frank Olivier <Frank.Olivier@microsoft.com>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, "david.bolter@gmail.com" <david.bolter@gmail.com>, "janina@rednote.net" <janina@rednote.net>, "oedipus@hicom.net" <oedipus@hicom.net>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, public-canvas-api-request@w3.org, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Shawn Warren <swarren@aisquared.com>, Tim Lalor <tlalor@aisquared.com>
An early post from Hironori Bono:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2010OctDec/0095.html

Ian showing interest, but also defensiveness:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-January/029751.html

The chilling effect:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-January/029776.html

This chilling effect is not based on actual costs to browser vendors.

Very simple fixes to the existing spec are neglected:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-July/027085.html

Neglected is not the right word: they are discouraged.

...

WCAG requires that content be labeled so as to be "Programmatically 
Determined". Serialization is a valid use case.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/

So is making canvas based UI accessible:
"Guideline 8. Ensure direct accessibility of embedded user interfaces."
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

Vendors should be promoting APIs to share information about the GUI, as 
stated in WAI-USERAGENT:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-USERAGENT/guidelines.html#gl-accessible-interface
Guideline 6. Implement interoperable application programming interfaces
"Programmatic access" is very much encouraged.

Currently, programmatic access to input devices, and to form elements,
specifically <input type="text"> <textarea> and <div contentEditable> is 
severely restricted.

That's something that additional work in the IME realm can provide.

I can not, at current, scroll the text inside of <input type="text">, 
accurately measure
the width of that text, nor determine where the cursor is in that text 
range.

...

I've worked very hard on whatwg and w3c lists to address real, 
identifiable usability to concerns,
and encountered incredible push-back under the guise of questioning "Use 
Case" validity.

As I've stated, many times, I no longer put forward Canvas as a use 
case, in my proposals.

Fortunately, I don't need to: The API deficiencies we're exploring are 
deficiencies in other web technologies.

The current debate is as to whether web programmers may develop their 
own IME, and whether
it's a valid use of the scripting environment. I feel that it's valid, 
some browser vendors do not.


-Charles
Received on Friday, 14 January 2011 21:35:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 14 January 2011 21:36:00 GMT