Re: [whatwg] hit regions: limited set of elements for fallback content

[Nils Dagsson Moskopp]

Steve Faulkner  writes:

> Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:
>
>> But still, people (with the exception of Paul Graham) stopped using  
>> for layouts
>
> if only that were true, take a look at https://www.google.co.uk or grep the
> html data available from http://webdevdata.org

Thanks for pointing out that my assumption was unfounded. I am
downloading one of the data sets right now.

>>Also, Faulkner wanting "an example of canvas to make accessible" ... seems
> like circular reasoning to me to use that as an example why >we need an
> accessible canvas.
>
> ?

1. A wants to demonstrate how technology X can do Y.
2. B: „because A wants to demonstrate how X does Y, we need X to do Y“.

reduces to:

3. “X should do Y because someone wants to show how X can do Y.”

Am I misunderstanding the argument by a large margin?

?Btw, I have actually read some of your posts regarding 
accessability and am aware you list quite a lot of arguments.)

-- 
Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann

Re: [whatwg] hit regions: limited set of elements for fallback content

[Steve Faulkner]

Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote:

> But still, people (with the exception of Paul Graham) stopped using  
> for layouts

if only that were true, take a look at https://www.google.co.uk or grep the
html data available from http://webdevdata.org

>Also, Faulkner wanting "an example of canvas to make accessible" ... seems
like circular reasoning to me to use that as an example why >we need an
accessible canvas.

?

--
stevef