Re: Bug 11239

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <> wrote:

> It seems that you agree with inclusion of such a list in the spec. However,
> I hope that you (and Tab) will agree that it is not something required by
> the decision. Therefore, it seems reasonably to pursue this advice
> separately. There is at least some concern about it. So better not to mix it
> in with the decision diff itself.

Yes, I agree.

The inappropriateness of <canvas> for text editing bears directly on bug
11239, though. It was filed as:

> Per Issue 74, we need an API that will let a magnifer be notified of caret
> screen location changes in response to editable text form elements in the
> Canvas DOM sub tree.
So the change proposal is trying to improve the accessibility of
canvas-based text editors. However, a much better way to address the problem
of canvas text editors not being accessible --- and being broken in many
other ways --- is to discourage authors from building them in the first
place. Providing partial APIs to support canvas-based text editing
encourages authors down the wrong path.

I suppose an alternative Change Proposal to that effect was needed before
the WG decision was made, and it's too late now. I apologize for missing the

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]

Received on Friday, 29 April 2011 10:30:58 UTC