W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

<canvas> Usage (Was: Begin discussions for pushing Last Call into 2010)

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 16:45:38 +0100
To: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20090815154538.GD5716@stripey.com>
Shelley Powers writes:

> I particularly liked David Hyatt's response to the discussion, where
> he called the Canvas object, and its associated API, nothing more than
> a "dynamic <img> "[6]. If that's all the Canvas was to be, then yes,
> inclusion in the HTML WG was appropriate. But Canvas, or I should say
> the 2D API, is much more than just a "dynamic image".
> [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0324.html

Could we define <canvas> simply to be a dynamic <img> -- that is, to
make other uses, such as Bespin, non-conforming?

In addition to the accessibility concerns of Bespin there are several
other problems of using <canvas> to create user interfaces; Philip
mentioned several in this message:


If <canvas> were only used as a dynamic <img> then it would presumably
be straightforward for authors to provide a non-graphical alternative:
it would be the same as the alt text would be were the image generated
server side and served as an <img>.

Received on Saturday, 15 August 2009 15:46:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:49 UTC