- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 13:33:52 +0200
- To: "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com>
- CC: "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, "Jatinder Mann" <jmann@microsoft.com>
On Wednesday, April 28, 2010, 7:45:55 AM, Simon wrote: SP> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 22:16:27 +0200, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com> SP> wrote: >> I would like to get clarification on the following passage [1]: >> "In non-interactive, static, visual media, if the canvas element has >> been previously painted on (e.g. if the page was viewed in an >> interactive visual medium and is now being printed, or if some script >> that ran during the page layout process painted on the element), then >> the canvas element represents embedded content with the current image >> and size. Otherwise, the element represents its fallback content >> instead." SP> This seems like a stupid requirement. Why would we want to print the SP> fallback? In many cases the fallback will be "your browser does not SP> support canvas". In which case it isn't fallback, its an excuse for not having provided any fallback. *Actual* fallback would be a static snapshot of the graphic, or a text description of what the graphic shows. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Technical Director, Interaction Domain W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 11:33:57 UTC