Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Canvas Text Metrics for Editing, Art and Design (Issue #1095)

alice left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1095)

> 3\. We're concerned that this proposal doesn't talk about providing equivalents for the text that is placed on the canvas that would be exposed to assistive technologies. One option the platform offers is canvas fallback content, though it has its limitations. Have you considered how this barrier may be overcome, and/or what specific advice should be given to content authors?

(Commenting as a colleague of Stephen's who provided accessibility guidance during the course of this work.)

My understanding is that the current state of the art is (unfortunately) for canvas-based applications to implement self-voicing solutions based on `aria-live` regions. I believe Stephen is investigating the extent to which fallback content is even used in practice for accessibility-related purposes, but what I hear from various sources is that canvas fallback content isn't really fit for purpose for most production use cases.

I think this represents a serious gap in the platform, and I agree that adding APIs to support more sophisticated use cases for text in canvas does make the need for addressing this gap increasingly pressing. However, I'm not sure what guidance can usefully be given in the context of this API while that gap persists.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1095#issuecomment-2983996393
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1095/2983996393@github.com>