W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

Re: CfC: Adopt ISSUE-105 canvas-usemap Change Proposal to add usemap attribute to the canvas element

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 08:54:20 -0700
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.vetagub3wxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:59:09 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  

> On Jun 23, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>> Since you think the proposal was a bad idea, there must be a counter  
>> proposal you can write that isn't a bad idea. Given that the proposal  
>> is "Add an attribute", (and assuming that it copies the sentence or so  
>> to give you complete explicit editing instructions to execute the  
>> proposal), I would expect a counter proposal that explains *why* it is  
>> a bad idea to document the existing behaviour of browsers in this way.
> Are you saying that browsers actually do something when a usemap  
> attribute is present on the canvas element?

Yes, that is what I (was) saying.

> Which browsers? Do you have a test case?

On further testing with a clearer test case, it turns out that I was  
wrong. The proposal would indeed require implementation work to be done.



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 15:55:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:20 UTC