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

Re: ISSUE-31 Change Proposal

From: Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:38:49 -0800
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CEE7DB1D-1E2E-4F04-A0A4-4A6FB4E2EBDC@adobe.com>
On Jan 29, 2010, at 7:47 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Laura and Ian, could you please identify together the parts of this Change Proposal that are uncontroversial, and make sure they get applied to the spec ASAP?

I have serious reservations about going this route.

The TF has considered the issue of alt text in great depth, and it contains a number of pieces that need to work together. As Laura said, "The point of the change proposal is to address the whole problem comprehensively." This is the change proposal. It should be discussed as a whole. If it's taken apart, it leaves much more room for the carefully considered exceptions and provisos to be omitted or contorted if it's subjected to mix-and-match, line-item veto treatment.

I support Ian and Laura marking up the parts of the proposal that are uncontroversial. I do not support putting the uncontroversial parts into the spec until we have arrived at a consensus on the whole problem. The risk of making the situation worse (and further damaging goodwill in the process) is too great.

-
m
Received on Saturday, 30 January 2010 02:40:21 GMT

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