W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: Canvas and ARIA alternatives

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 19:15:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEhSh3cFQxO4_WW5hoa_-PibXfLL+Bit9fqJ9iGJFHgYqUqmAA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Sharpe <isforums@manx.net>
Cc: Ramón Corominas <listas@ramoncorominas.com>, WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Ian Sharpe <isforums@manx.net> wrote:
> In particular, I am questioning the use of our limited time and resources
> trying to work around issues arising from the use (abuse?) of what is
> essentially a graphical element for user input when perfectly flexible
> accessible alternatives exist.

The alternatives aren't sufficiently flexible for what people want to
do. So we have to work on either making those existing features (e.g.
contenteditable) more flexible, or we have to work on bolt-on
accessibility for canvas (e.g. hit regions), or we have to work on new
features that are flexible *and* have built-in accessibility (e.g. web
components). In practice, we are doing all three. We can't *just* sit
on our hands and tell people to use the existing features that don't
address what they want to do - because at web scale they will be used
anyway.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2012 18:17:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:30 UTC