W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-canvas-api@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: hit testing and retained graphics

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 12:07:47 -0700
Message-Id: <203888DD-37A7-4FEF-8B51-AB0A0BA1DBB8@jumis.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
To: Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>
Adobe has released several canvas export tools; accessibility is part of  authoring tool guidelines.


Unfortunately many browser vendors have been underserved by their teams and/motivations: they are pushing back against supporting a11y for canvas content. Vendors of authoring tools are not even able to expose the accessibility information that might otherwise be shared. Many browser vendors are indeed discouraging it with a vague promise of future specs.

Most app are built atop 2D Apis, using widget libraries to manage their GUI. Few have declarative XML scene graphs. Mozilla does have them, it took a lot of extensions and custom coding. I bring that up because as a web app dev, I'd like to have a reasonable chance to compete with desktop/flash apps. To do that, I need some subset of the tools/vocabulary that those developers have. There are no / nearly no examples of complex SVG based applications. There are existing complex Canvas based apps and there are many-many examples of app GUIs built on simple 2d Apis analogous to canvas.

Developers of complex apps are very likely to use the tools available to them, the ones that have been available to them for decades; it has only been a short time that we've actually had a large enough vocabulary to develop desktop-style apps in the browser. Now that a vocabulary exists, the market can develop.

-Charles 


On Jul 6, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com> wrote:

> 
> Le 1 juil. 2011 à 15:15, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
>>> Why would you believe for a moment that nobody would make such a decision?
>> 
>> Because it's *really* hard.  *Much* harder than just using HTML.
> 
> It depends on what you want to do. As soon as Macromedia created a tool to draw circles, triangles, and shiny things, it was a **lot easier** for Print/Animation designers to produce content put on the Web through flash.
> As soon as "Export as canvas" will be softwares, the people who have no clue will use it. 
> 
> You are addressing the wrong crowd. The crowd who will use Canvas will not be Web developers, but people who Motion Graphics Designer, Artistic Director, doing exactly the same mistakes that were done with flash, using motion graphics for the wrong thing. 
> 
> NOW, the interesting question is 
> 
> Would "creating accessibility hooks in Canvas" (whatever it means) help solve accessibility issues for users of content developed with these tools used by designers.
> 
> DESIGNERS  ---> TOOLS ---> CONTENT ---> BROWSERS ---> USERS
>                           (canvas)
> 
> -- 
> Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
> Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2011 19:08:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:10:31 UTC