W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 8722] focus behaviour should be same for canvas regions as for elements

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:34:27 +0000
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Ni2mB-00051D-DG@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8722


steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |




--- Comment #8 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>  2010-02-18 09:34:27 ---

hi ian, 

I will try to ask/explain it from a different perspective then.
Unless a focus event is recognized by AT, at the co-ordinates of the focus
rectangle drawn on the canvas, then AT will not be able to move focus to the
rectangle as it effectively has no meaning other than a being a shape on the
canvas. I understand that a focus event can be flagged by the use of standard
APIs. Does the the spec currently require/recommend that such an event flag
occurs when the focus rectangle is drawn? If not why not? 





(In reply to comment #7)
> Whether the UA actually moves focused elements into view or not without an AT
> is in fact completely at the whim of the UA  the spec doesn't even give a
> "may" for that. (If you think it should, please file another bug  I think it
> would be reasonable to explicitly allow that.)
> As a user, if I wanted to move focus around without the page scrolling, e.g.
> because I happen to know the page's design and I want to be looking at the top
> of the page while tabbing to controls under the fold, I don't see why my user
> agent should be non-conforming if it gives me that option.
> Generally speaking, everything in the UI is optional. The user agent is the
> _user_ agent, not the author agent. It's supposed to do whatever the _user_
> wants. This means that pretty much any user interface feature is optional.
> Heck, the entire rendering section is optional.
> EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
> satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
> you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
> reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
> Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
> title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
> yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
> Status: Rejected
> Change Description: no spec change
> Rationale: making this a "may" is consistent with the best interests of users
> and consistent with all other user interface requirements in the spec.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2010 09:34:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:02 GMT