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

Re: Change Proposals Regarding Missing alt and Conformance (ISSUE 31)

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:00:59 -0600
Message-ID: <AANLkTinjTDAUaTH5P0beksQJKe8Zkjv8+Rjv29PTtOED@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hello Everyone,

I have been asked to provide further details and history of the proposals at:

Proposal number 1 is Ian's.

I wrote proposals number 2 through 6.

Proposal number 2 is and always has been the change proposal which
implements WAI CG's recommendation and which is the accessibility task
force recommendation:

I drafted proposals number 3 and 4 at the Chairs' request because the
accessibility task force did not have rationale for aria-labelledby or
role="presentation" in their proposal (but now it does, thanks to

It was last June that the HTML WG Chairs asked that rationale be
provided for the aria-labelledby and role="presentation" or to exclude
them from the accessibility task force change proposal. So in June I
asked the task force for help in providing rationale for
aria-labelledby and role="presentation":

No one responded to my call for help. So in July I created
proposals 3 an 4 without those options and informed the task force.

Since then people have contacted me off list saying that no
accessibility task force response to my TF queries is indicative of
weak rationale for aria-labelledby and role="presentation". They would
like proposals 3 and 4 as offerings for the HTMLWG survey.

Proposal 5 was created to try to address Jonas and T.V Raman's concerns.

Proposal 6 was created to try to address Vlad Alexander concerns. He
has no faith W3C HTML WG or WHATWG, so I submitted this proposal on
his behalf.

I can live with any of the Change Proposals that I drafted. They all
have the commonality of  disallowing <img> to be valid with the
generator mechanism, email exception, and title attribute as well as
requiring the structural Integrity of the <img> element.

Best Regards,

Related references:

On 11/7/10, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> I read the tpac minutes. There seems to have been some confusion over
> the alt change proposals regarding missing alt and conformance
> checkers.
> To try to help delineate those change proposals and the options they
> contain, I put together a new wiki page:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElementSurveyConformaceChoices

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 01:01:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:15 UTC