Re: Integration of HTM

Sorry to bring this up again, but can we please please please use a
different term than "shadow DOM". "Shadow DOM" is already used for a
very different thing in XBL2, and I'm worried about confusion.

Several other terms have been suggested, such as "Fallback DOM", "DOM
inside <canvas>", "Accessibility DOM", "Accessibility tree", "fallback
tree".

I think this would be beneficial for both XBL2 and for the
accessibility discussions not to have these things confused.

Best Regards,
Jonas Sicking
Mozilla

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Ian, others,
>
> We are working on canvas accessibility for the shadow DOM and I am working
> with the Mozilla team on the shadow DOM approach with some sample code from
> Microsoft.
>
> As we discussed, the use of media query of alternative content I am working
> to pull over a standard set of attributes from the IMS Access For All
> specification. It was suggested that we preface these with an aria-, however
> these are not part of the aria specification and preceding these with an
> aria- dash would not give credit to the IMS Access For All effort.
>
> I raised the suggestion that these be preceded with afa- but we agreed this
> would require agreement from the working group.
>
> For example, one attribute would be AdaptationType and we would define an
> equivalent CSS Media query property for it.
>
> What's the group on using afa- to preamble each attribute name? ... or
> should we just include the attributes without the afa-?
>
> As was requested they would not be limited to canvas content selection and
> at the moment I see no naming conflicts with existing HTML 5 attributes.
>
> Rich
>
>
> Rich Schwerdtfeger
> Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist

Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 22:02:36 UTC