Re: Revert request r7023

I encourage vendors to act by assigning resources to produce actionable implementations. Waiting and/or following the invention of the editor is a bit backwards.

His strength is in identifying APIs common across vendors and writing them up in his document.

I've stated my concerns; I withdraw my revert request. The "bugs" in this change to Canvas are public. I'm going to work on implementation instead of pursuing bug reports and process.

-Charles

On Mar 14, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Charles wrote:
> 
>> I'm concerned that the change will create undo burden on implementers
>> and authors. A much simpler change set was proposed last year and has
>> not been addressed by the editor.
>> 
>> It's my contention that the editor's "Path" object, as it is authored,
>> is not appropriate for Canvas 2D but may be appropriate for SVG2[…]
> 
> We oppose this revert request. We've been advocating for the addition of
> an exposed Path object to the <canvas> 2D Context API for a long time—it
> greatly improves the general utility of the 2D Context API, in addition
> to its obvious accessibility benefits.
> 
> I encourage other vendors supportive of this change to also speak up.
> 
> As Steve Faulkner said, Charles,
>> I would suggest the best way forward is to file bugs against the spec
>> and then follow the usual escalation process if needed.
> 
> 
> Ted
>

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 16:41:31 UTC