W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: Last weeks Action Item

From: Patrick H. Lauke <patrickl@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 02:43:57 +0100
Message-ID: <4BC66F5D.10202@opera.com>
To: UAWG list <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
On 14/04/2010 16:39, Simon Harper wrote:
> Hi there,
> So as normal I'm thrashing this about - and I wanted comments on wording
> - I expect the wording here to change but here goes:
> 4.7.x Location in Hierarchy: The user can view the path of nodes leading
> from the root of any content hierarchy in which the structure and
> semantics are implied by presentation, as opposed to an explicit logical
> structure with defined semantics (such as the HTML5 Canvas Element), or
> as a consequence of decentralized-extensibility (such as the HTML5 item
> / itemprop microdtata elements), and only if the user agent keeps an
> internal model of the hierarchy which it does not expose via the DOM or
> some other accessibility mechanism. (Level A).

Still trying to wrap my head around this, and picking up on that mention 
of canvas: the ua itself wouldn't necessarily keep a standardised 
hierarchy of what happens inside canvas. All the UA knows is that it's a 
canvas and what the state of each pixel in that canvas is. It's the 
developers who will build/keep whatever structures they need in their 
scripts. These will be non-standard and specific to each 
site/script/developer. I'm not sure how the UA could expose these in any 
sort of meaningful way, or even identify which of the data structures 
kept by any given script represent what the developer uses to keep track 
in their script of what goes on the canvas. Is it then not the duty of 
the developer (i.e. WCAG domain) to make sure that this info is somehow 
exposed in a standardised way?

Patrick H. Lauke

Web Evangelist
Developer Relations Team
Opera - http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 01:44:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:39 UTC