W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Thoughts towards an accessible <canvas>

From: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 08:51:57 +0000
Message-ID: <49C5FC2D.6040109@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
To: "John Foliot - WATS.ca" <foliot@wats.ca>
CC: 'Charles McCathieNevile' <chaals@opera.com>, 'John Foliot' <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, 'Wai-Ig' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, wai-xtech@w3.org, 'HTMLWG' <public-html@w3.org>, 'WebAIM Discussion List' <webaim-forum@list.webaim.org>, 'Gawds_Discuss' <gawds_discuss@yahoogroups.com>

John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote:

> Recently I’ve come under attack (sometimes viscously and personally)
> for daring to suggest that “fail” when writing HTML5 should have
> catastrophic consequences. The most recent incident involves my
> exploration of what should constitute appropriate (and now
> mandatory) fallback content for the <canvas> element. Brushing aside
> the personal attacks by small and narrow minds, I’d like to explore
> and expand upon my position a bit further.

John, I don't think you should have to suffer such attacks.

Would you be willing to publish them, so that the various
WG Chairmen have a chance to review them and to take whatever
action is necessary to ensure that the senders are left in
no doubt that such attacks will not be tolerated ?

Philip TAYLOR.
Received on Sunday, 22 March 2009 08:53:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:43 UTC