W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Issue 142: Video Poster [Was: Reminder: January Change Proposal Deadlines]

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 08:14:26 -0600
Message-ID: <AANLkTinNMDyzWs3u4xyrT8pifa4tojgWhS+b6mb0bzqG@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi David and everyone,

Janina wrote:

>> May I amend my assertion to say that the need for alt text is not
>> controversial among the TF?

David wrote:

> If you *want* to show something that is semantically different, and needs
> its own labeling, then it is easy to do;  show a div

Does this mean that you consider it more of a want than a need?  Do
you consider some sort of mechanism (other than a div) which supplies
a text alternative for a video key frame  is not a functional
requirement for HTML5?

> I am also concerned that 'alt' breaks a very fundamental design principle.

This is a core disagreement. "Access for people with disabilities is
essential. This does not mean that features should be omitted if not
all users can fully make use of them but rather that
alternative/equivalent mechanisms must be provided. Example: The image
in the img element is not perceivable by blind users. That is not a
reason to drop the element from the specification, but is a reason to
require mechanisms for adding text alternatives." [1]

Best Regards,

[1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/AccessibilityDesignPrinciple

Laura

-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 5 January 2011 14:15:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:17 UTC