- From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 12:02:05 -0500
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, janina@rednote.net
- Cc: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, public-canvas-api@w3.org, public-canvas-api-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFD659A92A.89AA56F0-ON862577AA.005B9311-862577AA.005D9363@us.ibm.com>
So, I agree with you Steve. The first time I mentioned <canvas> to an IBM product team the first thing that came out of their mouths was "this is great, we could use canvas to tied to existing HTML controls to draw their own custom UI. Can you make that accessible?" The reason we needed ARIA today is because some people in the HTML working group were adamant that HTML would only be used for documents. Then Netscape pushed JavaScript much the same way we will see <canvas> being pushed. While I appreciate what Ian wants it is not connected with what really happens. To give an example, the table element states that tables "must not" be used for layout, yet I will tell you that custom UI components use tables for just this purpose because browsers do not match layout the same way across browsers and authors require this functionality. Second, there are millions of database applications that use tables for layouts. All this code is not going to be rewritten over a religious debate. Third, it is an unenforceable requirement. You cannot tell with one hundred percent certainty that tables will be used for layouts. Screen readers have tons of code in them to try to guess if tables are being used for layouts. They do not get it right all the time as they have admitted to me. They will tell you that they do a really good job - but that is it. Unfortunately, accessibility requires the tools to allow the author to annotate markup in the event that an author does things like use canvas for editors. The difference between our perspective and Ian's is - Ian can say why did that person waste their time doing something so stupid! Tell the person that there is a better way. - When a disabled user encounters the problem can't do their job and in this economy it may mean they lose it. The Web is too big to run around with the HTML 5 bible and bang all these web application developers over the head with the HTML 5 bible. We can certainly suggest that authors do something the right way as Ian suggests but frankly that is nothing more than a recommendation. So, if we are not given the tools to address this problem - as we did with the JavaScript problem we have another need for ARIA situation on our hands. This came at a huge cost in time and dollars to IBM. If we are not given the tools we need to address this issue (a bible will not work) I see this as an HTML 5 last call blocking issue. Rich Rich Schwerdtfeger CTO Accessibility Software Group From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> Cc: public-canvas-api@w3.org, Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS Date: 09/25/2010 04:11 PM Subject: Re: html5 editor responds to Canvas accessibility related bugs Sent by: public-canvas-api-request@w3.org This seems to round-up Ian's current sentiments: "In practice it may make more sense to stop people from wasting their time writing editors in <canvas>, which is not what <canvas> was for, and indeed makes little to no sense." Personally, I think that <canvas> sets forward a standard 2D API for HTML elements to be implemented in. But that's clearly not where Ian is at this point. -Charles On 9/25/2010 12:03 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote: Bug 10248 - Canvas requires a Caret Drawing call method Bug 10249 - Canvas requires a content selection method -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG Europe Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org Web Accessibility Toolbar - http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
Received on Sunday, 26 September 2010 17:03:02 UTC