W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 8885] Fallback mechanism for embedded content

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:38:59 +0000
To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NgbsR-0003hM-Un@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8885


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |NEEDSINFO




--- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>  2010-02-14 10:38:59 ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Did Not Understand Request
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: I don't understand. Could you elaborate?

The original bug was about this section:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#embedded-content-1

I first presumed that the issue here was intended to apply to all the elements
in that section: audio, canvas, embed, iframe, img, math, object, svg, and
video.

I can't find anything in the spec that says "used when an external resource
cannot be used", however, so I'm not sure what this is referring to. <object>
and <img> seem to be the only elements that use a mechanism like this, so maybe
this only applies to those? But the text refers to <video>, so maybe that's
what it means?

The problem described ("For example...") is a valid problem, but it doesn't
seem to highlight a problem with HTML, so much as a problem with an authoring
practice of an inexperienced author. Things like transcripts should be
available to all users all the time, not hidden as accessibility "fallback"s.

I'm at a loss as to what the problem is that is being described here. Any help
would be greatly appreciated.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 14 February 2010 10:39:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:02 GMT