- From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 08:07:06 -0600
- To: Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com>
- Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>, Canvas <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF3FBD0AEF.A59FC0C4-ON86257C8A.004CD912-86257C8A.004D8DF9@us.ibm.com>
Hi Dominic, We are trying to flush out an agreement for 1.0. Mozilla has implemented using the HitRegion API to bind the location with the fallback element. We are trying to deliver the minimal implementation for 1.0 that would allow us to support accessibility. We can't get Path done in a reasonable amount of time so we would use the current path. I am a bit uncomfortable about not adding actual hit testing. If we were to include that in the proposal would that satisfy a meets minimum for you for 1.0? My concern about not having hit testing is mobile touch devices and working with AT like VoiceOver and TalkBack with touch. The question is should we do this in 1.0 or 2.0. Regardless we will continue to work on other features of hit testing API in 2.0 - such as adding Path object support. I suspect we will also require a removehitregion in response to Charles later response. Rich Rich Schwerdtfeger From: Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com> To: Richard Schwerdtfeger/Austin/IBM@IBMUS Cc: Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, Canvas <public-canvas-api@w3.org> Date: 02/24/2014 05:46 PM Subject: Re: Canvas 1.0 Wait, to clarify, addHitRegion would not actually provide hit testing? Is the idea that it'd be added in the next spec revision? It seems odd to do this, the feature would ship in a way that doesn't really match the original intent of the spec. I thought Mozilla already implemented some of the actual hit testing features. - Dominic On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote: Hi Dominic, For version of the canvas 1.0 spec. we would like to have the following in the specification. 1. addHitRegion but only with an optional id and a fallback element to associate the element (this will set the location). e.g. addHitRegion (id,control) where control would be any fallback element at this time. 2. drawFocusIfNeeded but remove the step that sets the location. 1. This would not provide actual hit testing but it would assign the location at this time We would need you to agree and implement this in Chrome now and we would work to address the other additions to the addHitRegion spec. (from WhatWG) in v2.0. We also want your feedback on the spec. changes. Rich Rich Schwerdtfeger
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2014 14:07:49 UTC