You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As a starting point, the specification does not have an Accessibility Considerations section. Based on the a11y self-assessment the WG believes there are no known accessibility considerations related to the functionality exposed by the API.
Accessibility Checklist
The Accessibility Checklist document is structured into the following sections, with top-level conditions reproduced here to facilitate WG review. Those with a checkmark are considered relevant to this specification and will be discussed in more detail in the sections that follow.
If technology allows visual rendering of content
If technology provides author control over color
If technology provides features to accept user input
If technology provides user interaction features
If technology defines document semantics
If technology provides time-based visual media
If technology provides audio
If technology allows time limits
If technology allows text content
If technology creates objects that don't have an inherent text representation
If technology provides content fallback mechanisms, whether text or other formats
If technology provides visual graphics
If technology provides internationalization support
If technology defines accessible alternative features
If technology provides content directly for end-users
If technology defines an API
If technology defines a transmission protocol
If technology defines an API
If the API can be used for structured content, it provides features to represent all aspects of the content including hidden accessibility features.
N/A
If the API relies on user agents to generate a user interface, the specification provides guidance about accessibility requirements needed to enable full interaction with the API.
This API does not generate any user interface.
An early version of the API had a provision for user agents to display a permission prompt when information from this API was requested. Based on implementer feedback the permission prompt gating for this API was removed.
This suggests no accessibility considerations to be documented in this specification.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@kenchris please review together with relevant parties and suggest changes as appropriate. We will refer to this issue when we submit the a11y review request.
This is tracked as part of the wide review #177 for this API.
This issue is a record of the Devices and Sensors Working Group's response to the Accessibility Checklist for the Compute Pressure API. Completed Checklist is required for the submission of the Accessibility review, one of the wide reviews tracked in #177.
Compute Pressure API: Accessibility Considerations
As a starting point, the specification does not have an Accessibility Considerations section. Based on the a11y self-assessment the WG believes there are no known accessibility considerations related to the functionality exposed by the API.
Accessibility Checklist
The Accessibility Checklist document is structured into the following sections, with top-level conditions reproduced here to facilitate WG review. Those with a checkmark are considered relevant to this specification and will be discussed in more detail in the sections that follow.
If technology defines an API
N/A
This API does not generate any user interface.
An early version of the API had a provision for user agents to display a permission prompt when information from this API was requested. Based on implementer feedback the permission prompt gating for this API was removed.
This suggests no accessibility considerations to be documented in this specification.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: