Re: Issue 131 Change Proposal

On 2/12/2012 2:29 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Frank Olivier
> <>  wrote:
>> I would like to submit as a
>> change proposal for this issue.
> How does this proposal address screen magnifier content focus for
> multi-line spans of text?
> Also, the proposed spec text says:
> "User agents that support caret browsing can use the subdom text
> cursor position to indicate the current caret location on the screen."
> How is that supposed to happen?

Also this: "When an author renders text on a canvas with fillText or 
strokeText, they must also add an html element (div or span) with the 
same text, styling and position to the canvas subdom". It may be the 
case that styling can not be met, that styling would not result in 
similar dimensions, that the font available to Canvas may not be 
available in the subdom, and that calls to fillText and/or strokeText 
may be decorative or otherwise repeated for a particular effect. I've 
consistently argued that the fallback content should managed by the 
author, and should be flexible enough not to interfere with the A11y of 
Canvas itself. What I mean by that is: the author should be able to 
style the fallback content independently of the Canvas element.

I've continued to push for a CSS element to allow us authors to toggle 
on-and-off visibility of the fallback content v. the Canvas bitmap and 
width/height. This proposal would go against that effort.

<canvas><label><input type=checkbox> Example</label></canvas>

In real-world use, I want the fallback content to look like a typical 
form, though the Canvas display may be quite different.
I do not want my fallback content CSS style to match my Canvas 
presentational style, in most cases.


Received on Sunday, 12 February 2012 19:54:21 UTC