- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 07:18:34 -0500
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, public-canvas-api@w3.org, franko@microsoft.com, chuck@jumis.com, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, dbolter@mozilla.com
On 12/08/2011 11:24 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > Paul, Maciej, Sam, > > This is a request on behalf of the HTML Accessibility Task force to > reopen issue 131 on the basis of providing new information on regarding > exposing a text baseline in the Canvas 2D API specification. > > The change proposal is provided here: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/FocusRingTextBaseline As the original decision stated[1]: * Proposals to add baseline measurement support can be considered if sufficient detail is provided. ... the chairs find that this proposal provides that information, and therefore have decided to reopen this issue. Furthermore, based on the discussions at TPAC, concrete progress towards the development of another proposal[2], the fact that the original alternate proposal[3] has evolved further based on implementor feedback, and in the interest of time, the chairs have elected to reopen the entire issue, and not simply reopen this one facet. Operationally, this effectively means that the decision itself is vacated, and participants have full use of W3C's CVS, wikis, and mailing lists to use to develop their proposals. We further will state that we do not intend to honor any revert requests in the specific areas covered by issue 131. Our plans are to work with the various parties to see if there is any opportunity to split this into smaller, more focused issues. Once that process is complete, and if we continue to find areas of disagreement, we will call for proposals. The original proposals can be resubmitted as is, or can be updated. These proposals can be based on prior or current baselines. New proposals can also be submitted. Should we have multiple proposals, the chairs will carefully review each Change Proposal for completeness. We will expect full rationale for every difference from other proposals. Based on the outcome of the prior decision, we will also require testimonials from at least two major implementors that that they would be willing to implement the proposal should it be adopted. > Thank you, > Rich Schwerdtfeger - Sam Ruby [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Apr/0271.html [2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Canvas_hit_testing [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0521.html
Received on Friday, 9 December 2011 12:19:07 UTC