Re: Please vote on the canvas accessibility proposal

On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote:

> hi ian,
>
> >The one <canvas> I use on a regular basis (not a demo) has accessible
> >fallback and no adom="" attribute. Which is more common is  
> essentially
> >impossible to tell from purely anecdotal evidence.
>
>  > http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html?period=1
>
> Poblem is it doesn't as the fallback inside the canvas is neither  
> accessible to users of browsers that support AT, nor accessible to  
> users that don't. For Example in IE i get the text "You need canvas  
> support for this page.".
>
> If you choose a sample of 1...
>
> >I didn't say the probability was equal.
>
> i have no expertise in probability, i took this "equally a  
> possibility" to mean the same thing.
>
> > does any data support that attribute use follows this pattern of 50%
> > inappropriate use?
>
> Actually data for similar attributes -- longdesc="" and summary=""  
> come to
> mind -- show that the attributes are misused vastly more often than  
> 50% of
> the time.
> Its not a similar attribute, the misuse of these attributes comes  
> from not providing appropriate content (text or a link to  
> alternative content).
> Please provide data that shows that boolean attributes are "misused  
> vastly more often than 50%"

We can probably convince some helpful people to gather data on this.  
But it might be hard to do a proper survey, because useful alternative  
content might only be added by the same script that draws on the  
canvas, rather than initially present in the page. So the typical  
surveys of static page content might not be adequate.

Regards,
Maciej