<canvas> and the 2D context API (was RE: Begin discussions for pushing Last Call into 2010)

On Wednesday, August 12, 2009 4:37 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
> > I will also say that while I truly did not have an idea how the
> > current poll would end up (and even though there does appear to be a
> > trend at the moment, I'm still not certain), I do have a strong
> > intuition on what the consensus would be on canvas at the moment.

> The current working group may consider that the current charter can be
> stretched to include Canvas, but I'm not sure others outside of the
> group would agree. (Though I'm not sure that the working group of today
> would necessarily vote the same -- the makeup of the group is different.
> Views about the Canvas element are also different. )

My understanding is that the WG decision was that canvas was in scope for
the working group. The mail documenting the decision [1] indicates that
there was some support for the 2D context API being documented separately:

  We also note support for splitting the immediate mode graphics API
  out of the HTML 5 spec and inten to pursue that option by
  recruiting writing resources.

I don't know whether having the <canvas> element defined in the HTML 5 spec but the graphics API in a separate document solves the accessibility issue at the root of this thread. I suspect there is some relationship since a different API would likely require different accessibility support.

Nonetheless, I think Microsoft would support that separation since, amongst other things, it would allow the graphics API to proceed in the longer term on a different rhythm to the HTML 5 spec itself.



[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Dec/0094.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 00:12:16 UTC