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

Re: Shadow Dom stuff

From: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:41:10 +0300
To: Mark Sadecki <mark@sadecki.com>
Cc: "Richard Schwerdtfeger" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
Message-Id: <147ef59ff22.e4e597b832317.18080383172146114@zoho.com>
Sorry for creating this confusion. I only intended to ask if anyone is making working examples for accessible canvas, with what we currently have working so we can identify any additional issues from the author perspective. 
My mentioning magnifcation was out of date. 


All the best

Lisa Seeman

Athena ICT Accessibility Projects 
LinkedIn, Twitter





---- On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 18:30:24 +0300 Mark Sadecki&lt;mark@sadecki.com&gt; wrote ---- 


Hi Rich,

I agree with you and was also confused by Lisa’s original suggestion.  I was hoping she would clarify if she indeed meant Shadow DOM, or fallback content by making the distinction.  I think we should also make it clear that Hit Regions now support associating that fallback content with regions on the canvas for the purpose of informing the AAPI, which should alleviate any concern she has about magnification.
 

Mark



On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger &lt;schwer@us.ibm.com&gt; wrote:
  Mark, 
 
 I understand that. While that is true, the approach that Lisa was talking about in concept is in concept what she was asking for so there is no need to have an alternative shadow DOM strategy. 
 
 Rich
 
 
 Rich Schwerdtfeger
 
 Mark Sadecki ---08/19/2014 09:22:23 AM---I think its probably best to refer to it as fallback content in canvas.  I know associate Shadow DOM
 
 From: Mark Sadecki &lt;mark@sadecki.com&gt;
 To: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
 Cc: Rik Cabanier &lt;cabanier@gmail.com&gt;, "lisa.seeman" &lt;lisa.seeman@zoho.com&gt;, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" &lt;public-canvas-api@w3.org&gt;
 Date: 08/19/2014 09:22 AM

 Subject: Re: Shadow Dom stuff
 
Sent by: mark.sadecki@gmail.com
 
 
 
 I think its probably best to refer to it as fallback content in canvas.  I know associate Shadow DOM with the work that is being done in Web Components.
 
 mark
 
 
 On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger &lt;schwer@us.ibm.com&gt; wrote: Canvas fallback content is a shadow DOM of sorts. I am confused. 
 
 
 Rich Schwerdtfeger
 
 Rik Cabanier ---08/15/2014 01:29:11 PM---On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:57 AM, lisa.seeman &lt;lisa.seeman@zoho.com&gt; wrote: &gt; Hi Folks
 
 From: Rik Cabanier &lt;cabanier@gmail.com&gt;
 To: "lisa.seeman" &lt;lisa.seeman@zoho.com&gt;
 Cc: "public-canvas-api@w3.org" &lt;public-canvas-api@w3.org&gt;
 Date: 08/15/2014 01:29 PM
 Subject: Re: Shadow Dom stuff
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 9:57 AM, lisa.seeman &lt;lisa.seeman@zoho.com&gt; wrote:  Hi Folks
 I was thinking that we need people to use the shadow DOM to make existing inaccessible  Canvas implementations accessible and see how hard it is and how to explain how to do it to developers.  (With the understanding that we can not get everything working yet - like magnification.)
 
 Is anyone working on this? 
 Can you rephrase the question? Are you asking if someone is educating authors?
 Why would magnification not work?  
 




 


 
Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2014 17:44:37 UTC

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