Re: <canvas> Usage (Was: Begin discussions for pushing Last Call into 2010)

hi jonas

>Could we define <canvas> simply to be a dynamic <img> -- that is, to
>make other uses, such as Bespin, non-conforming?

This really solves nothing as "non-conforming" in terms of author
conformance in HTML 5 appears to me to have little meaning, for the most
part it will not be tested or testable by conformance checkers, besides
developers are going to do what they will with canvas regardless of whether
what they do is comforming or not.

What is required is methods implemented to make providing accessible canvas
content as easy and simple as possible.

2009/8/15 Smylers <>

> Shelley Powers writes:
> > I particularly liked David Hyatt's response to the discussion, where
> > he called the Canvas object, and its associated API, nothing more than
> > a "dynamic <img> "[6]. If that's all the Canvas was to be, then yes,
> > inclusion in the HTML WG was appropriate. But Canvas, or I should say
> > the 2D API, is much more than just a "dynamic image".
> >
> > [6]
> Could we define <canvas> simply to be a dynamic <img> -- that is, to
> make other uses, such as Bespin, non-conforming?
> In addition to the accessibility concerns of Bespin there are several
> other problems of using <canvas> to create user interfaces; Philip
> mentioned several in this message:
> If <canvas> were only used as a dynamic <img> then it would presumably
> be straightforward for authors to provide a non-graphical alternative:
> it would be the same as the alt text would be were the image generated
> server side and served as an <img>.
> Smylers

with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium |
Web Accessibility Toolbar -

Received on Saturday, 15 August 2009 21:55:23 UTC