I don't object.
AKA +1
On Nov 18, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Frank, David, Chuck, Steve, Cynthia -
>
> In an effort to move things along I would like a vote of from the canvas accessibility sub team members. When we submitted on issue 131 our drawFocusRing method was accepted with the exception of canDrawCustom and there was concern that a situation could occur whereby a CustomFocusRing could be draw without driving the magnifier and Maciej had discussed separating the method into two function calls. At the Face to Face Maciej did not feel strongly that was needed.
>
> With the inclusion of hit testing we would now have the ability to provide the bounds of all objects to accessible objects associated with fallback content. Therefore I see no reason to change the method for drawFocusRing that is currently in the canvas 2D API to draw a custom focus ring to provide the bounds of the object given that by binding a path to a fallback content element we can provide the bounds necessary to the accessible object in the platform accessibility API or to a browser extension that may wish to provide magnification capability to objecs.
>
> So, assuming that Frank is drafting a modification to the Canvas 2D API to provide the bounds to accessible objects by binding the drawing path to a DOM element:
>
> 1. Does anyone object to leaving drawFocusRing as defined in the current working draft:
>
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/2dcontext/#focus-management
>
> 2. Does anyone object to my reopening issue 131 solely for providing the textBaseline in textMetrics (I will of course submit a change proposal to the canvas accessibility sub-team and accessibility task force for review)?
>
> Please respond with I object or I don't object.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
> Rich
>
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> CTO Accessibility Software Group