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

Re: Integration of HTM

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:40:00 -0600
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF89DC89E6.84162E06-ON862576C0.005B78A6-862576C0.005B8DAC@us.ibm.com>


This is in contradiction with your earlier statements.


Rich Schwerdtfeger
Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist

             Maciej Stachowiak                                             
             02/04/2010 10:16          Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>          
             AM                                                         cc 
                                       Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>,   
                                       Re: Integration of HTM              

On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Richard Schwerdtfeger 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.
> I really don't think this is a good idea, as explained in the following
> e-mails:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0488.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/1151.html
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0931.html
> I do not think it is necessary to have multiple inline alternatives for
> <canvas>, nor do I think it is necessary for widgets that represent the
> graphically-rendered widgets on a <canvas> to be marked up separately
> an inline alternative representation. The existing features of HTML
> already allow us to have multiple alternatives. Adding more features for
> this is IMHO a mistake.

I agree. I don't think the <accessible> tag is an improvement. In the
common case, the same content can work as an accessible DOM and as fallback
content. And that's also the model for other elements that use fallback
content partly for accessibility purposes (e.g. <object>). I don't see the
case for making canvas accessibility intrinsically more complicated.


(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

(image/gif attachment: pic24144.gif)

(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Thursday, 4 February 2010 16:40:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:58 UTC