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

Re: Discussion on Change Proposal for ISSUE-66

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:15:36 +0900
Cc: 'Maciej Stachowiak' <mjs@apple.com>, 'Matt May' <mattmay@adobe.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
Message-Id: <174FF883-52BF-44BF-84AB-BB0D0234BDC2@apple.com>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>

On Jan 22, 2010, at 17:21 , John Foliot wrote:
> I'm more skeptical of EXIF, but accept the possibility because it has
> already been specified elsewhere (my impression is that most EXIF data
> today is machine written, and thus also lacks the ability to express
> intent - but I am hardly an EXIF expert and stand to be corrected if I am
> wrong).  Keep the language of the specification in the present and not the
> future and let's move on.  That's all.
> 
> 

The vast majority of EXIF data is indeed pretty irrelevant to this purpose and machine-generated.  However, the Metadata Working Group specifically mentions the 'Description' tag, and increasingly cataloging and web upload programs use that, and so users are increasingly filling it in.  Sometimes the description generated by the photographer/creator are more accurate than those of the person who put the image on the web, especially when the web author leaves alt out :-(


David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Friday, 22 January 2010 09:16:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:00 GMT