- From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@adobe.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 21:24:37 -0700
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>
- CC: "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, HTML A11Y TF Public <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi Mark, the canvas spec only deals with the 2d canvas CONTEXT and not with the canvas ELEMENT. As such, fallback content for canvas should be handled by the HTML spec and not 2d canvas. Testing for this feature also falls under the HTML umbrella. Rik ________________________________________ From: Sam Ruby [rubys@intertwingly.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:58 PM To: Mark Sadecki Cc: public-html-admin@w3.org; HTML A11Y TF Public Subject: Re: CfC: Approve overview of Canvas testing in view of permissive CR exit criteria On 09/04/2013 11:21 PM, Mark Sadecki wrote: > > In reviewing the tests for fallback content [4] we did not find any that > tested focusable or interactive content as fallback for the canvas > element. We conducted independent tests and found that there was solid > support for focusable elements like anchors. However, there was poor > support for form elements or other interactive content when they were > included as children of the canvas element. The above paragraph was provided as feedback to the overview of Canvas testing, but does not appear to be associated with any section in the Canvas document. How would you like this feedback to be handled? - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 04:28:22 UTC