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

Re: Proof of growth of acceptance/implementation - longdesc

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 07:33:27 +0100
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Message-Id: <67B95FD1-6AC1-4625-AB02-E8F643D843D7@googlemail.com>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>

On 22 Sep 2010, at 07:14, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:

> On 22 Sep 2010, at 02:08, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> However, clearly, this demonstrates that the lack of validity and 
>> definition of @longdesc in HTML5 only serves to pollute @longdesc even 
>> more.
> 
> How? Drew Wilson's misuse of "longdesc" is /premised/ on its validity ("longdesc is a completely valid image attribute") and he is aware of the correct definition ("is meant to contain a URL to a description of the image"): he's just choosing to ignore it.

Oh okay, in fairness he's engaging in rules lawyering about it:

"HTML4 says fullsize should link to a descrip. A larger image is conceptually the same. it's a compromise. I wont be changing it, i'll just release version 2 :)"

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/65877u

I'm not sure the spec can easily protect itself against this sort of hostile misreading though (it's fairly clear in HTML4 that "longdesc" is for /text/ alternatives), and it does sound like he's saying the next iteration will use "data-*".

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 06:34:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:14 UTC