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

Re: Canvas 2D API specification update

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:27:33 -0500
Message-ID: <643cc0270910211527i7dc7bd1ta82d9e38ff6f7184@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Eliot Graff <eliotgra@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Frank Olivier <franko@microsoft.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Is Microsoft considering a Canvas implementation in IE? I must admit to
> having some discomfort with the spec being edited by the one implementor
> that has *not* implemented Canvas so far. Good future stewardship of the API
> requires having a stake in its success, and Microsoft's past attitude
> towards Canvas has been one of hostility at worst and indifference at best.
> It seems to me that this creates the potential for significant conflict of
> interest.

First, I want to thank Doug and Eliot for their work on the
specification. I appreciate the effort, and look forward to reading it
and hopefully providing some useful feedback. Well, I'll try to
provide feedback, I can't guarantee the usefulness.

As to whether Eliot, who is an employee of MS, should be involved in
this effort as editor, I believe he volunteered when no else did. And
I wouldn't say that MS doesn't have experience with 2D graphics.

I must admit, I'd like to know if this means MS will implement the
Canvas 2D functionality. However, I would also hate to make anyone
feel uncomfortable contributing to this, or any effort.

>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>


Shelley

> On Oct 21, 2009, at 12:58 PM, Eliot Graff wrote:
>
>> In his mail describing why he created a separate Canvas 2D API
>> specification, Doug Schepers wrote [1]:
>>
>>> There is a chance that currently Canvas could be a blocker on progress
>>> for the HTML5 spec, and at this point, Canvas is so widely implemented
>>> that I don't think it's at risk, so I hope this isn't disruptive.  I am
>>> available to help with any editing that needs doing, but I hope that
>>> others will also work with this draft, and step into the editor role.
>>
>> At Microsoft, we agree with the sentiments expressed by Doug, Maciej [2],
>> and others about creating a separate Canvas 2D API specification. [3]  We
>> are prepared to offer editorial resources to aid in the completion of this
>> separate specification. We have looked over Doug's initial document, made
>> some editorial enhancements, and are prepared to follow through in taking
>> feedback and maintaining the specification.
>>
>> We believe that some sort of accessibility API functionality is needed in
>> the canvas element. However, the exact nature and depth of that
>> functionality presents a dilemma that may block progress on the HTML5 spec.
>> We also think that the Canvas 2D API may be a desirable feature used in
>> other technologies such as SVG.
>>
>> Starting with Doug Schepers' initial draft, we made changes to get the
>> document to adhere to the W3C PubRules [4], enhance readability, and improve
>> logical flow of the document. In addition, we foresee adding sample code
>> throughout the specification, where appropriate. No normative changes have
>> been made. As with all drafts, the Canvas 2D API specification is still a
>> work in progress. We would like to solicit feedback about the changes that
>> were made (see below TODO) and about further changes that the working group
>> would like to see.
>>
>> Our updated version is published at
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/canvas-api/canvas-2d-api.html.
>>
>> [1]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2009JulSep/0002.html
>> [2]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-canvas-api/2009JulSep/0007.html
>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0628.html
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules
>>
>> Edits:
>> PubRules verified or applied throughout the specification, including
>> fixing broken links and applying accessibility requirements.
>> Addition of normative references to remove reliance upon links to HTML5
>> specification
>> General language, formatting, and logical edits, such as:
>>        Alphabetizing attributes and methods within existing sections
>>        Editing sentences to make them easier to understand
>>        Breaking long sentences, noun stacks, etc. to enhance readability
>>        Reordering paragraphs to create more seamless flow within sections
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 21 October 2009 22:28:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC