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

Re: Integration of HTM

From: David Bolter <david.bolter@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:15:37 -0500
Message-ID: <4B701C89.6050605@gmail.com>
To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, public-html-request@w3.org
Hi Rich.

I'll try to qualify my position better on future calls. When it comes to 
canvas a11y I have tried to express my 'second thoughts' in most 
discussions. Communication is hard and I think we need a few things as 
soon as possible:

1. A web page where the various proposals can live and grow.
2. More accessibility hackers on the canvas accessibility calls; I'm 
looking at you browser a11y developers.
3. To focus our energy on exploring the solutions.

Let's see how far we can go with the best proposals we have so far. I'm 
hoping to keep space today to explore what others (Steve etc) have tried 
and to further explore myself, how far we can go without extra 
tags/attributes.

cheers,
David

On 05/02/10 7:25 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> David gave consensus agreement in a vote we had on Monday. David had second
> thoughts and expressed them to me today. It happens and is part of the
> process of solving problems. Don't assume that I manufactured statements
> from members, Jonas, because David has concerns about a proposal after the
> fact. That is not consistent with W3C process and I don't operate that way.
>
> Earlier this week we started working on design issues around using
> <accessible>  and I spoke with David today. We are looking for an
> alternative way, to having an<accessible>  DOM within<canvas>, to make
> canvas directly accessible as many users would prefer this approach. It
> does not mean that fallback content would be used to do this. David said he
> would be doing prototype work on his approach for next week. Make no
> mistake about it that making canvas directly accessible has its challenges
> but it can be done using the<accessible>  DOM approach in many instances.
>
> We agreed that we can't just afford to punt on the concept of a directly
> accessible<canvas>  as too many end users will want to have this. In HTML
> 4.01 the W3C made similar errors with JavaScript and CSS and said you had
> to be accessible with either technology turned off. Developers were saddled
> with these handcuffs for over a decade. HTML 5 is too important to industry
> to have these restrictions again. You will find that I tend to put options
> into developers hands to make things accessible vs. sticking my head in the
> sand on it, which in my mind was how we addressed JavaScript accessibility.
>
> To give you an example of what I am talking about regarding how developers
> might use canvas,  I was in a meeting with IBM research on HTML 5 and the
> first words out of their mouths was: Canvas is great and we can now take
> HTML controls and render them using a canvas UI. I am not saying that I am
> in favor of that approach but I am realistic in knowing that if there is a
> way to be creative a developer will do it.
>
> Rich
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
>
>
>               Jonas Sicking
>               <jonas@sicking.cc
>               >                                                           To
>                                         Richard
>               02/04/2010 05:18          Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
>               PM                                                         cc
>                                         Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch>,
>                                         "public-html@w3.org"
>                                         <public-html@w3.org>,
>                                         public-html-request@w3.org
>                                                                     Subject
>                                         Re: Integration of HTM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> So I talked with David Bolter about his feelings regarding this proposal.
> Apparently he has expressed concern about the complexity of this proposal
> and did not back up the statement that this had "agreement from the Mozilla
> accessibility people".
>
> He had however agreed to look at implementing a prototype of this proposal.
>
> / Jonas
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger<schwer@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>    I have agreement from the Mozilla accessibility people and the Apple
>    accessibility people who actually attend the calls and do the work.
>
>
>
>
>    Rich Schwerdtfeger
>    Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
>
>    Inactive hide details for Jonas Sicking ---02/04/2010 11:05:59 AM---On
>    Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger<  schJonas Sicking
>    ---02/04/2010 11:05:59 AM---On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Richard
>    Schwerdtfeger<  schwer@us.ibm.com
>
>                           Jon
>                           as
>                           Sic
>                           kin
>                           g                                              To
>                           <jo
>                           nas        Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
>                           @si
>                           cki                                            cc
>                           ng.
>                           cc>         Ian Hickson<?ian@hixie.ch>, "?,
>                                      public-html@w3.org"<
>                                      public-html@w3.org>,
>                           02/        public-html-request@w3.org
>                           04/
>                           201                                       Subject
>                           0
>                           11:        Re: Integration of HTM
>                           05
>                           AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger<,schwer@us.ibm.com
>    >  wrote:
>          Ian,
>
>          The group has heard your comments. We don't agree with you. I am
>          not going to have another email discussion dragged into the weeds
>          like what has happened on summary. I think we have had adequate
>          discussion on the topic and this will be part of the proposal we go
>          forward with.
>
>          We have agreement from Apple, Microsoft, IBM, and Mozilla and we
>          are working on an implementation.
>
>    Please note that there is no such thing as "agreement from Mozilla". The
>    mozilla community is composed of individuals that often differ in
>    opinion. In matters of web standards we usually don't form an "official
>    mozilla position" or any thing like that. So while there very well might
>    be people at mozilla that support this proposal, it is not "agreement
>    from Mozilla".
>
>    Personally I have the same reaction as Ian.
>
>    I'll also note that Maciej is from Apple and appears not to like this
>    proposal either. However I don't know what Apples policy is on these
>    things.
>
>    Best Regards,
>    Jonas Sicking
>    Mozilla
>
>
>
>
>
>    
Received on Monday, 8 February 2010 14:24:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:01 GMT