W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-canvas-api@w3.org > April to June 2014

Minutes: Canvas Accessibility Sub Group Teleconference, 28 APR 2014

From: Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:26:04 -0400
Message-ID: <535FB67C.5090209@w3.org>
To: HTML A11Y TF Public <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, public-canvas-api@w3.org
Hello,

The minutes for the Canvas Accessibility Sub Group Teleconference 28 APR 2014
are available in HTML and plain text below.  Supporting information for this Sub
Group can be found on the wiki: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Canvas

HTML: http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-minutes.html

TEXT:

   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

             Canvas Accessibility Sub-Group Teleconference

28 Apr 2014

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Janina Sajka, Mark Sadecki, Jay Munro, Ric Cabanier,
          Rich Schwerdtfeger

   Regrets
   Chair
          Mark Sadecki

   Scribe
          MarkS

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Final Review of Last Call Draft
         2. [5]Implementations
         3. [6]Testing
         4. [7]Next Meeting
     * [8]Summary of Action Items
     __________________________________________________________

   <trackbot> Date: 28 April 2014

   <scribe> Meeting: Canvas Accessibility Sub-Group Sub-Group

   <scribe> scribe: MarkS

Final Review of Last Call Draft

   JM: I incorporated all changes we've agreed on.
   ... with the exception of the paragraph we had for the SoTD
   ... I have an email out to Robin and Sam regarding keeping that
   in this spec only. The SoTD has reusable components, I want to
   make sure this change only happens in Canvas and doesn't
   propagate to other HTML specs

   we could use this time to review that text

   JM: also waiting to hear back on other items related to going
   back to LC

   This draft incorporates changes made by the Canvas
   Accessibility Sub-Group [1] (minutes[2]) in response to
   comments from the HTML Accessibility Task Force [3] and adds
   support for visual focus indicators (drawFocusIfNeeded()[4])
   and a method for informing accessibility APIs of the location
   of focusable regions (Hit Regions[5]). These features were
   carefully designed to be forward compatible with Canvas 2D
   Context, Level 2 [6].

      [1] http://www.w3.org/
      [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/28-html-a11y-irc

   RS: we might not want to limit it to focusable regions

   JS: i think notifying is more common

   RS: we should be consistent with drawFocusRing

   <richardschwerdtfeger> Optionally, inform the user that the
   focus is at the location given by the intended path. User
   agents may wait until the next time the event loop reaches its
   "update the rendering" step to optionally inform the user.

   RS: updating location information in Accessibility APIs

   <richardschwerdtfeger> Updating the accessibility API of the
   location of fallback elements that are representative of the
   corresponding hit region location.

   MS: I will re-wordsmith and send Jay the edits so we can get it
   back to the the WG

Implementations

   MS: Rik has a patch pending with support for Canvas Level 1

   RC: It's in code review now.

   MS: Once we get a new draft published for Last Call, I will
   contact dominic to get feedback and implementation timelines

   <jaymunro> [9]http://status.modern.ie/

      [9] http://status.modern.ie/

   RS: Be great to get IE

Testing

   MS: Test results are currently showing drawFocusIf

   Needed tests as failing, probably because they are behind a
   flag

   RC: I will start the process for getting the feature to ship

   [10]https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/2dcon
   text/drawing-paths-to-the-canvas

     [10]
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/2dcontext/drawing-paths-to-the-canvas

   [11]https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/2dcon
   text/hit-regions

     [11]
https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/tree/master/2dcontext/hit-regions

Next Meeting

   MS: should we continue to meet weekly? Should we start work on
   L2? Jay are L1 and L2 synced?

   JM: I took a look at that lately and there has been some
   diversion. They have been cherry picking changes from WHAT WG
   and those changes are overwritten some of the changes I made to
   L2.
   ... have been doing some research into the history of the
   cherry picking. We'll have to find a way to keep our changes.

   JS: we can do that. we just have to figure out if the changes
   are intentional or just an oversight.

   JM: I will follow up with editors to find out what the process
   is for applying changes from WHAT WG

   MS: I'm thinking that recurring items moving forward will be
   Implementations and testing and reviewing cherry picking for
   accessibility related items, suggest moving to every other week
   for this meeting?

   WFM

   RS: Is anyone going to talk to WCAG for techniques?

   JS: I could probably do that. Probably talk to James Nurthen
   about that.

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [12]scribe.perl version
    1.138 ([13]CVS log)
    $Date: 2014-04-29 14:24:24 $

     [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 14:26:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:57 UTC