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

Re: hit testing and retained graphics

From: paniz alipour <alipourpaniz@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 16:02:15 +0430
Message-ID: <CADfq16h3gH2hD1u8tQGLLWNLF=9FaXYh1eQeWgfUKaJ+=Ymz_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: chuck@jumis.com, franko@microsoft.com, Mike@w3.org, david.bolter@gmail.com, cyns@exchange.microsoft.com, public-canvas-api@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
Hello to all,

Maybe you think that this question is not related to this discussion,

But I want to know whether the web widget that are located on canvas,

are they incredible .I mean a check box with height 70,weight 70,

or no it will design as the common web widget on websites?

Thanks

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:11 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger
<schwer@us.ibm.com>wrote:

> Charles, Frank, Mike,
>
> I am back from vacation. How far do we need to go with hit testing? Right
> now I am looking at associating a closed draw path with a DOM object in the
> canvas subtree. We would then need to address the routing of pointing device
> input events to the DOM object. The drawing path can be used to provide
> bound information to platform accessibility API.
>
> Do we need to bind any other drawing properties to the canvas object -
> similar to the way device context's are handled on graphic subsystems like
> Windows?
>
> Mike, I am including you as before I went on vacation you indicated that a
> number of developers desired this feature and wanted to be involved.
>
> Rich
>
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> CTO Accessibility Software Group
>



-- 
Paniz Alipour
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2011 11:32:44 UTC

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