Re: Integration of HTM

Thank you Richard!

/ Jonas

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>wrote:

>  We are calling it the accessible DOM for canvas. It starts and ends with
> the <accessible></accessible> tags and it is not visually rendered. It is
> not fallback content. It is a subtree of canvas separate from the fallback
> content.
>
>
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Jonas Sicking ---02/03/2010 04:02:14
> PM---Sorry to bring this up again, but can we please please plea]Jonas
> Sicking ---02/03/2010 04:02:14 PM---Sorry to bring this up again, but can we
> please please please use a
>
>
>     *Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>*
>
>             02/03/2010 04:01 PM
>
>
> To
>
> Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
> cc
>
> Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
> Subject
>
> Re: Integration of HTM
>
> Sorry to bring this up again, but can we please please please use a
> different term than "shadow DOM". "Shadow DOM" is already used for a
> very different thing in XBL2, and I'm worried about confusion.
>
> Several other terms have been suggested, such as "Fallback DOM", "DOM
> inside <canvas>", "Accessibility DOM", "Accessibility tree", "fallback
> tree".
>
> I think this would be beneficial for both XBL2 and for the
> accessibility discussions not to have these things confused.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jonas Sicking
> Mozilla
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> > Ian, others,
> >
> > We are working on canvas accessibility for the shadow DOM and I am
> working
> > with the Mozilla team on the shadow DOM approach with some sample code
> from
> > Microsoft.
> >
> > As we discussed, the use of media query of alternative content I am
> working
> > to pull over a standard set of attributes from the IMS Access For All
> > specification. It was suggested that we preface these with an aria-,
> however
> > these are not part of the aria specification and preceding these with an
> > aria- dash would not give credit to the IMS Access For All effort.
> >
> > I raised the suggestion that these be preceded with afa- but we agreed
> this
> > would require agreement from the working group.
> >
> > For example, one attribute would be AdaptationType and we would define an
> > equivalent CSS Media query property for it.
> >
> > What's the group on using afa- to preamble each attribute name? ... or
> > should we just include the attributes without the afa-?
> >
> > As was requested they would not be limited to canvas content selection
> and
> > at the moment I see no naming conflicts with existing HTML 5 attributes.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> >
> > Rich Schwerdtfeger
> > Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
>