- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 00:58:35 -0800
- To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
- Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, public-html-request@w3.org
On Nov 22, 2007, at 8:50 AM, Joshue O Connor wrote: > Does <canvas> (if I am correct in my first sentence) allow various > kinds > of fall back content to serve different user needs also? Or is it a > case > of "Can't see the video" here a text equivalent rather like <img>? Is > <canvas> a "one piece of fall back/alternate content" element? <canvas> can have arbitrary markup as fallback content, not just text. So, for example, you can include structured text, form controls, ARIA markup or some combination of these to give a full accessible experience. > This is a tricky issue. > > I have seen some cool things done with <canvas> but am unsure of if > whether it is suitable as a mechanism to serve the needs of AT users. > This is an interesting juncture as the multimedia explosion on the web > means that we been to define elements that can deal with very complex > and varying modalities. Unless the web gets 'stolen' by some > proprietary > platform that can do all this stuff, and better that HTML5. > > Am undecided myself about <canvas> vs SVG but I do know that SVG has > been around longer and has functionality that I just don't know if > it is > possible with <canvas>. > > If anyone knows - please enlighten me. SVG can do things that <canvas> can't, and vice versa. There are also things that both can do, but one may be a better choice than the other. Fortunately it's not an either-or proposition. The latest versions of Safari, Opera and Firefox support both canvas and SVG. So both immeidate-mode and structured retained-mode graphics are available. Hope this hels, Maciej
Received on Friday, 23 November 2007 08:58:55 UTC