- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 01:49:56 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > > We are calling it the accessible DOM for canvas. It starts and ends with > the <accessible></accessible> tags and it is not visually rendered. I really don't think this is a good idea, as explained in the following e-mails: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0488.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/1151.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/0931.html I do not think it is necessary to have multiple inline alternatives for <canvas>, nor do I think it is necessary for widgets that represent the graphically-rendered widgets on a <canvas> to be marked up separately from an inline alternative representation. The existing features of HTML already allow us to have multiple alternatives. Adding more features for this is IMHO a mistake. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 4 February 2010 02:20:54 UTC