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

Re: Alternate CP to resolve ISSUE-74 (also resolves ISSUE-105)

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:33:49 -0500
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, public-html-a11y-request@w3.org, "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, public-canvas-api@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFC99CB11E.0D05BCA3-ON86257745.007B3139-86257745.007BF1F4@us.ibm.com>

Hi Charles,

Do you want us to discuss this on Monday or do you need more time for

Would you prefer, for now, for us to start comments now on the list?

... I need to let people know if we will have a canvas accessibility
meeting on Monday and if we do I would like you to be on the call. Please
let me know



Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group

From:	"Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
To:	"Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc:	"HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Date:	06/14/2010 07:00 AM
Subject:	Re: Alternate CP to resolve ISSUE-74 (also resolves ISSUE-105)
Sent by:	public-html-a11y-request@w3.org

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:15:53 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli
<xn--mlform-iua@målform.no> wrote:

> Charles McCathieNevile, Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:39:58 +0200:
>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:33:23 +0200, Charles McCathieNevile:
>>> I'll try to update
>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom with this
>>> content in the next hour or so,
>> Done, plus I got a big chunk of the way through the details section -
> (1) I notice that you, unlike how Steve and John have said (I believe),
> pose this solution as a *replacement of* - and not an alternative to -
> the accessible DOM. I believe you have had that approach the whole
> time, because the proposal has had the direction "HTML 4 Maps, not
> accessible DOM" all the time.

I have always had that approach. This proposal is technically compatible
with the nonav proposal (or even with what Ian has currently), but for
reasons I hope are outlined in the proposal rationale already I think it
is better to have one approach, and I believe this is the simplest for

> (2) May be you should push (harder) on the fact that this solution is
> more compatible with the 1001 variations of "Don't reinvent the
> cow/path/wheel" in our Design Principles, than the aDOM. ;-)

Yes. That's an important part of why I think this approach makes sense.



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

Received on Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:34:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:11 UTC