Dear TF:
The attached will be of interest to those working on canvas a11y.
Janina
--
Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200
sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org
Linux Foundation http://a11y.org
Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Forwarded message 1
http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-205
Change Proposals:
CaretSelection Revisited:
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/CaretSelectionRevised
No_edit:
http://www.w3.org/wiki/No_edit_change_proposal_for_canvas_text_editing
CaretSelectionRevised has use cases, rationale, and sufficient level of
detail to proceed to a survey. The use cases however are located on a
wiki that contain a number of counter-proposals. Isolating the use
cases from the other proposals needs to be addressed prior to moving to
a survey.
No_edit does not address the use cases provided. It asserts that the
rationale is "well reasoned" without providing justification for this
assertion. It also makes other assertions such as "superior" and "more
accessible" without providing any supporting evidence or addressing the
original proposal.
The details section is incomplete in that it lists examples of things
that could be added instead of providing a set of edit instructions,
specific enough that they can be applied without ambiguity.
As to the other proposals on the wiki that haven't been presented, it
would be OK to revise the No_edit proposal to include these. Otherwise,
they won't be considered in the HTML5 time frame. This may be what is
intended by this proposal, as this proposal makes the suggestion that
follow-on work occur in a Community Group.
Net: the minimum necessary changes required to proceed to a survey are
to isolate the use cases and to enumerate the references to other
technologies. It would be advisable for the No_edit proposal to address
the use cases provided.
- Sam Ruby