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

Re: hit testing and retained graphics (resending)

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 14:03:28 -0700
Message-ID: <4E1770A0.1030106@jumis.com>
To: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
CC: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, public-html-request@w3.org
On 7/8/2011 1:32 PM, James Robinson wrote:
>     > 5) I've taken time out of my extremely busy schedule to try to
>     help find
>     > a third path here, between your retained-mode canvas extensions and
>     > browser vendors' proposal that authors use SVG for those cases
>     instead,
>     > because I care about graphics accessibility. I think that a shared
>     > Canvas-SVG 2D graphics API is desirable for general use, and also
>     > happens to address the specific use cases you seem to have
>     expressed for
>     > the problem at hand [1]; the SVG WG will be working on this
>     SVG-Canvas
>     > integration at our next F2F this month in any case. You don't
>     seem to
>     > agree currently that this is a good solution, citing that
>     certain parts
>     > of it need to be defined and implemented (which we agree on),
>     but seem
>     > to overlook this same flaw in your own proposal (along with the
>     added
>     > disadvantage that browser vendors have said they will not
>     implement your
>     > proposal). But I have neither time nor inclination to quibble
>     with you.
>     > If you change your mind, and want to develop the Canvas-SVG idea
>     > further, I'll be happy to help. If not, I wish you luck in finding
>     > another solution that meets your use cases and is acceptable to
>     > implementers.
>     >
>     No. I did not say that I did not agree with the solution. In fact,
>     there is a lot of merit in addressing the two solutions together
>     as it would allow us to work on SVG accessibility as well as
>     canvas at the same time. If SVG could use a similar shadow DOM
>     with accessibility support based on HTML 5 that would be huge!
>     I simply stated that I have not heard browser vendors weigh in on
>     the fact that they supported it (somewhere in my last 2 notes).
>     Please don't take this personally. This was my quote: "Doug, I
>     think the problem is that the browser manufacturers have also not
>     supported the integration of SVG into canvas."
>     Have you heard from Microsoft, Apple, or Google that they would
>     support this approach? If so, I am all in. I mean if you are going
>     to put in all this work on canvas-svg integration I would try to
>     get some buy in on the approach to start. This is why I have
>     avoided prototyping hit testing in canvas. Frankly, the hit
>     testing is not terribly hard to do but like you I have a lot of
>     demands on my time.
> To be perfectly frank, speaking only for myself and not for other 
> people at Google or in the Chromium project, I've been reluctant to 
> chime in on these threads because it seems that everyone who does gets 
> flamed out within a few messages.  If this mailing list was not so 
> toxic I suspect there would be a broader, more productive discussion. 
>  That said, I'm confident that Doug's proposal will be given due 
> consideration by the proper people at the proper time.
> - James

Give it a go some time. I work hard to submit issues to the Chromium 
bugs list.
Your team has done great work, I've followed it closely for the past ~16 

I think the limitations of the CSS box model are very apparent in the 
Google Docs suite. It's an excellent suite,
but it does not even come close to what is available on the desktop. 
I've spent the last four years working
on how to close that gap in the near future.

There is a very wide difference between the content that can be created 
with Googles sketch and presentation
tools, and the content that I've been able to manage via Canvas web 
apps. These self-imposed limitations mean less innovation;
and that leaves it up to independent companies and r&d groups to come up 
with their own.

That's a big part of my struggle with the large vendors here. When MS or 
Apple says they will not allow company developers
to develop canvas-driven text editing, that is a corporate decision -- 
but it should not impact my ability to do it.

And so far, it has not impacted me: the fixes that I've needed to make 
have been approved by the w3c and/or webkit teams.
Microsoft was already ahead of the game with A11y.

I'm bringing this up to suggest, as you have your internal discussions, 
that you keep in mind how limited
other Google developers are by the priorities set within Chromium 
relating to accessibility and Canvas.

Received on Friday, 8 July 2011 21:04:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:10:32 UTC