- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:16:17 -0500
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- CC: chuck@jumis.com, cyns@exchange.microsoft.com, david.bolter@gmail.com, Frank Olivier <Frank.Olivier@microsoft.com>, jbrewer@w3.org, mike@w3.org, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, public-canvas-api@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 02/07/2012 06:32 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > Sam, > > If you recall I submitted a separate change proposal for the text > baseline which caused the reopening of Issue 131. The original proposal > had deficiencies as outlined by the chairs. Paul is aware of this as I > reminded him in January. > > My suggestion would be to do the following: > > 1. Keep Ian's drawfocusring methods. They are acceptable to the > accessibility task force and they separate out drawFocusRing into two > functions drawSystemFocusRing and drawCustomFocusRing eliminating the > need for canDrawCustom per below. > 2. Include back Chapter 11 on Caret and Selection Management. This > section was approved by the chairs prior to the decision to vacate. > 3. Review the new text baseline proposal to see if it sufficiently meets > your needs. The text baseline in textmetrics provides information to the > author to enable the author to compute a focus ring's or caret's bounds. Decide what Change Proposals you want to put forward, and we will review them and the ones that we find meet basic requirements we will include in whatever survey there might be on this subject. The current status of this issue can be found here: http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-131 > Cheers, > Rich - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 00:23:36 UTC