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

Re: CfC: Adopt ISSUE-105 canvas-usemap Change Proposal to add usemap attribute to the canvas element

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 07:42:18 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTinrNxADmcxOJAeaV1JBwGavzqW2urDKC0w__Mvd@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Is there anybody apart from Ian who does not understand what the change
proposal [1] is asking for?


[1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/addimagemaptocanvas

regards
Stevef

On 24 June 2010 23:14, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:10 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > It should also be noted that the change proposal does not give enough
> > > detail for the spec to be edited to address the proposal. Merely
> > > making the "usemap" attribute legal on <canvas> doesn't do anything to
> > > make usemap="" actually work on <canvas>.
> >
> > If this were true, it would invalidate the original Change Proposal, if
> > I understand correctly.  However, I looked at the spec for usemap and
> > didn't see anything that looked ambiguous.  What's an example sentence
> > in the spec that you don't think can be changed unambiguously based on
> > just "Add the usemap attribute to the canvas element"?  You'd have to
> > update the image map processing model too, but I don't see anything
> > where it would be unclear how to change it to get it to work as
> > expected.
>
> My point was just that the actual changes are far greater in scope than
> the text in the change proposal might suggest, which I think is a bit
> misleading. Following the change proposal to the letter wouldn't leave the
> spec in a consistent or useful state; normally, the chairs insist on
> excessive detail (for example, see what Sam has been asking of Henri with
> respect to the ASCII reference!). It seems very inconsistent of the
> chairs, and in this case Sam in particular, to allow a single sentence
> here despite this needed changes to multiple sections, including normative
> changes to a processing model, multiple indexes, and the IDL requirements,
> when a trivial issue such as what reference one should have for ASCII, of
> all things, requires detailed and explicit text.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Friday, 25 June 2010 06:43:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:10 GMT