Re: Request to re-open issue 131

Having reviewed HTML-Hixie, I do have one strong preference. I'd like to see the semantic that MS implemented (per the specs) supported in the future spec. While we have found it deficient, it's not without merit. It's implemented and widely distributed.

I'd like to see us keeping the drawFocusRing method name. We can easily specify the three calling semantics in WebIDL.

For the special-case that Maciej has brought forward, a second, optional, string argument would be more appropriate than using two distinct method names. That's how things are currently handled in Canvas, with pattern creation, for instance.

The second argument would be 'visible' if specified-- it is visible by default.

drawFocusRing(element);
drawFocusRing(element, 'hidden');

Note that the existing method as implemented by IE9 would also be supported.

-Charles




On Oct 26, 2011, at 9:22 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:

> 
> Not yet, sorry! I will try to get to it soon.
> 
>  - Maciej
> 
> 
> On Oct 25, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> 
>> Maciej, 
>> 
>> You agreed to provide feedback on my change proposal for this a couple weeks ago. Have you had a chance to do that? I have not seen anything on the list. 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Rich
>> 
>> 
>> Rich Schwerdtfeger
>> CTO Accessibility Software Group
>> 
>> <graycol.gif>Richard Schwerdtfeger---10/25/2011 11:03:22 AM---Paul, Per your request. I would like to request that the chairs reopen issue 131.
>> 
>> From:	Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
>> To:	Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, mjs@apple.com, public-canvas-api@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, 
>> Cc:	franko@microsoft.com, chuck@jumis.com, cyns@exchange.microsoft.com
>> Date:	10/25/2011 11:03 AM
>> Subject:	Request to re-open issue 131
>> Sent by:	public-canvas-api-request@w3.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Paul,
>> 
>> Per your request. I would like to request that the chairs reopen issue 131. 
>> 
>> In the chair's decision on issue 131 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Apr/0270.html)
>> 
>> - The chairs did not have adequate information as to the definition of a text Baseline property supplied in text metrics.
>> - The removal of canDrawCustom was not adopted even though it was possible for an author draw a custom focus ring without it matching the actual path provided to drawFocusRing. 
>> 
>> We would like to reopen this issue for the following reasons:
>> 
>> - We will provide a change proposal that includes the additional information needed to define the text baseline and because after discussions with developers, such as Tab Atkins, it was agreed it would be of tremendous value to have the text baseline to compute focus rings around text rendered on the canvas. 
>> - I spoke with Maciej at the Apple campus after the decision and he felt it would be better for developers to have two separate API for drawing focus rings. One would be for drawing a focus ring that took on the standard platform drawing conventions for a focus ring and a separate custom focus ring that would allow an author to draw a custom focus ring but still drive magnification features in the browser. 
>> - I would like to bring our spec. closer to WhatWg which attempted to separate out drawFocusRing into two methods for the reasons Maciej stated. Ian had made those changes to the WhatWG spec. after also speaking with Maciej.
>> 
>> 
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2011Jul/0123.html
>> 
>> 
>> Rich Schwerdtfeger
>