- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'Paul Bakaus'" <pbakaus@zynga.com>, "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Charles Pritchard'" <chuck@jumis.com>, "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <chaals@opera.com>, "'Richard Schwerdtfeger'" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "'Cameron McCormack'" <cam@mcc.id.au>, "'Cynthia Shelly'" <cyns@microsoft.com>, <david.bolter@gmail.com>, "'Frank Olivier'" <Frank.Olivier@microsoft.com>, <Mike@w3.org>, <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>, <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Paul Bakaus wrote: > > there are very few production > apps out there that could benefit largely from increased accessibility > on the canvas object itself. In other words, you will happily ship a work product that does not meet accessibility requirements? I just want to be 100% crystal clear here, as this is how I am interpreting that statement. After all, all animals are created equal, some are just more equal than others. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm#Pigs) JF
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 15:11:45 UTC