RE: Call for Consensus: Canvas 2d spec

We have implementations done in Chrome and almost done in Firefox. We as a
minimum require drawSystemFocusRing. Both IBM and Pearson need to this
function and we cannot afford to exclude low vision users in this release.

Look guys, I appreciate that catching up is not a lot of fun (such as the
IE UAIG mappings:
https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testreport?testsuite_id=2&filter_invalid=on&filter_required=on&filter=Filter
+view
) but other people have done the work. It is inappropriate to hold up this
work just because you are behind.

Rich


Rich Schwerdtfeger



From:	Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
To:	Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Cc:	Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>,
            "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Jatinder
            Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
Date:	11/13/2013 09:42 PM
Subject:	RE: Call for Consensus: Canvas 2d spec



Based on the feedback from Jatinder and Apple, Microsoft does not support
this proposal.  We believe that the focus ring APIs need significant work,
and should be moved to L2 rather than put at risk in L1.

-----Original Message-----
From: Janina Sajka [mailto:janina@rednote.net]
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 10:30 PM
To: Cynthia Shelly
Cc: Charles McCathie Nevile; public-html-a11y@w3.org; Jatinder Mann
Subject: Re: Call for Consensus: Canvas 2d spec

I believe the CfC is concerned with testing for consensus about which a11y
items are expected in the current Canvas revision, i.e. "At Risk"
for the moment but implemented and testable in the near term, versus those
we agree to postpone to "level 2," if I'm recalling the nomenclature
correctly.


This is different, imo, from a discussion of optimal naming of the methods.
Can we not conclude testing consensus over this even as we continue to
discuss optimal naming of these methods?


Janina

Cynthia Shelly writes:
> I'd like to ask that this call be postponed for a couple of days.  The
> discussion between Rik and Jatinder around the naming of
> drawFocusRings is not complete.  Jatinder's mail bounced, and has just
> been forwarded to the list.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2013Nov/0015.html
>
> Microsoft would like to discuss this at TPAC during the HTML5 meeting, or
at next week's html-a11y meeting.
>
> Thanks,
> Cynthia
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles McCathie Nevile [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru]
> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 11:20 PM
> To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
> Subject: Call for Consensus: Canvas 2d spec
>
> Hi folks,
>
> this is a call for consensus on the following two propositions:
>
> The HTML Accessibility Task Force accepts that path objects and relevant
methods operating on them, hit regions, text metrics other than width, and
ellipses could be moved to Canvas2d level 2 - i.e. a later verion of the
specification.
>
> The HTML Accessibility Task Force accepts that the drawSystemFocusRing
and drawCustomFocusRing methods on elements in the "canvas shadow DOM" are
"at risk" in Canvas2D - and that without implementation, the Canvas2D
specification could drop them  to move to Recommendation.
>
> For more background to these questions, please see
> http://www.w3.org/2013/10/31-html-a11y-minutes.html#item03
>
> Silence will be considered assent, but positive answers for each of the
two propositions are preferred. Responses will be accepted until Midnight
Hawaiian time on Wednesday November 13, and should be made in this email
thread.
>
> for the facilitators
>
> Chaals
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
>        chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com

--

Janina Sajka,		 Phone:		 +1.443.300.2200
		 		 		 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		 		 Email:		 janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:		 http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,		 Protocols & Formats		 http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
		 Indie UI
http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/