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

Re: ISSUE-74 canvas-accessibility and ISSUE-105 canvas-use

From: <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 19:48:46 -0400
Message-Id: <201010072348.o97Nmkob009535@sonata.rednote.net>
To: public-html@w3.org
Dear HTML-WG and Chairs:

The Accessibility Task Force discussed the Chairs' proposal (below) at its teleconference today:
http://www.w3.org/2010/10/07-html-a11y-minutes.html#item12


The summary of our recommendations is as follows:

RE: (1) Should we add a caret location API to canvas, or is the focus API sufficient?

The Task Force requests deferring this question until the end of the year because of additional engineering work at IBM and Microsoft which is seeking to determine whether the TF proposals are sufficient to support a11y in an canvas/cloud application such as a rich text editor. We believe the p"look and feel" of canvas based applications via the web is sufficiently compelling that there is high liklihood canvas would be used that way, and we need to be certain that a11y support is correctly specified.

The TF accepts questions 2-5 as specified below excepting that we understand #4 to be actually a counterproposal and recommend that identifying #4 as a counterproposal would help clarify the question appropriately in context.

The TF has no objection to proceeding on questions 2-5. Our deferral request is only for question #1.

Janina Sajka, HTML-A11Y Task Force CoFacilitator

>    From: Maciej Stachowiak <[13]mjs@apple.com>
>    Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:01:24 -0700
>    Message-id: <758DEFE6-1CD1-4A4C-9E89-D7B7E8FEF977@apple.com>
>    To: "[14]public-html@w3.org WG" <[15]public-html@w3.org>
>
>
>The two issues relating to canvas accessibility have a number of Change Proposals submitted:
>
>[16]http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-074
>[17]http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-105
>
>In reviewing these, the Chairs find that there are a number of separate questions that are not in perfect alignment with the Cha
>nge Proposals or the issues:
>
>(1) Should we add a caret location API to canvas, or is the focus API sufficient?
>
>Supported by: [18]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility
>Opposed by: [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jul/0219.html
>Partially opposed by: [20]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom
>
>(2) Should we add a boolean nonav attribute to the canvas to hide its contents from AT and keyboard navigation?
>
>Supported by: [21]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibilitynonav
>Opposed by: [22]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom
>Opposed by: [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jul/0219.html
>
>(3) Should we remove the ability to use the children of canvas as an accessible dom entirely, in favor of other techniques, such
> as usemap?
>
>Supported by: [24]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom
>Opposed by: [25]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibilitynonav
>Opposed by: [26]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jul/0219.html
>
>(4) Should we add advisory text explaining how to use the focus rect API for efficient caret position notification, and change n
>othing else?
>
>Supported by: [27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jul/0219.html
>Opposed by: [28]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/canvasaccessibility
>
>(5) Should we add image map / usemap support as a possible way to represent focusable regions on the canvas?
>
>Supported by: [29]http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/addimagemaptocanvas
>Supported by: ttp://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/Map4NotAdom
>
>
>The Chairs think it would be best to survey each of these questions separately. If the Working Group is amenable to that approac
>h, we will likely issue a five-part survey. If you have any comments or suggestions regarding this plan, please submit them by a
> week from today (Tuesday, September 28).
>
>This is also a final opportunity for authors of the referenced Change Proposals to update their Change Proposals with any additi
>onal material they think is relevant or helpful to the decision.
>
>
>Regards,
>Maciej
>


Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
		sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 23:49:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:15 GMT