- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:54:45 -0700
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
In addition to Dan's comments... I have received a progress report from one of the Apple accessibility experts who attended the telecon on <canvas> accessibility. Based on what I heard from him, I believe good progress is being made, and the proposal might be able to avoid large changes to canvas. We should ask the task force working on a proposal if they need any technical assistance from <canvas> experts, and if that would enable them to pull in the due date. Regards, Maciej On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:47 AM, Dan Connolly wrote: > Please let's take care with subject lines... this > isn't about the telconference agenda... > > On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 10:23 -0500, Shelley Powers wrote: >>> >>> >>> Issue-74/Action-133 canvas-accessibility >>> This item is not due this week, but I'm choosing to flag it at this >>> time as it as a target date of 2009-12-17 which would preclude us >>> for >>> going to Last Call this year. I'd like to put out a call for >>> volunteers: if there is anybody out there with an interest and >>> ability >>> to help pull this date in, I would like to ask that they step >>> forward. >> >> One suggestion I have on this, and yes I know this was based on a >> previous vote, is that we re-consider whether to keep the Canvas >> element >> in HTML 5, or to spin it off, either into a new working group, or >> potential future working group. >> >> I know that folks wanted this item covered by _some_ working group, >> but >> canvas accessibility issues could end up holding back the entire >> HTML 5 >> document, because canvas accessibility isn't going to be a quick fix, >> not from what I can see. In addition, tying the element to the HTML 5 >> will hinder future innovation. >> >> Frankly, the HTML 5 specification is already overly large, and the >> HTML >> 5 object, other than the element tag, really doesn't fit in with a >> specification titled "HTML" anything. >> >> Is there any possibility that this one could be raised to a new >> item, or >> be reconsidered? > > Whether to include an immediate-mode graphics API is the one > technical issue this WG has actually decided: > ISSUE-15 immediate-mode-graphics proposal carries over objections > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Dec/0094.html > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/15 > > So we can only reconsider that if there's new information. > > That the HTML 5 spec is big is not new information. > > Nor are accessibility concerns around canvas; discussion > of that goes back at least as far as Apr 2007 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0986.html > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E > >
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 18:55:33 UTC