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

Re: no-title CP - remarks

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 17:28:45 +0200
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110511172845373072.a120baf5@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Steve Faulkner, Wed, 11 May 2011 09:36:20 +0100:
> HiĀ  All, 
> 
> 1. Leif's proposal does not require a re-opening of the decision 
> since it does not call for the use of title in the absence of alt to 
> be non conforming. So I suggest that it is inappropriate to consider 
> it in terms of re-opening, the changes Leif proposes should first be 
> submitted as last call bugs.

I'm not strong on the process questions. But it is the chairs' task to 
assess whether I've provided reasons to re-open. The Decision decided 
what is supposed to be valid, and the CP I've collected suggests a 
different solution to that problem than what is the outcome of the 
Decision.

I also remember from a subgroup comment that there was doubt wether we 
could 100% avoid the generator exception (in some form/shape). It is 
implied from your comment above that if we can't 100% the generator 
exception then we don't have any reason to ask for the generator 
exception to be reopened ...

What perhaps is important, though, is that there is a solid basis at 
that point when the chairs re-assess the situation and draw a 
conclusion - because they don't like to go back and forth on issues.

> 2. There has been consistent consensus within the a11y taskforce and 
> prior in the WAI-CG guidance on alt, that title not be considered 
> conforming when alt is absent. If the group wishes to reconsider this 
> in light of Leif's arguments then the move to re-open the decision 
> would be defunct and I would withdraw my proposal to re-open.
> 
> To resolve this I suggest that we poll the group to find out whether 
> Leif's proposal changes the consensus of the group.

My suggestion is that you look at my CP and steal as much as you can 
from it. I have yet to see that you have taken in *anything* that I 
have said on this issue.

I'm still open to suggest that it should be an outright error to to not 
provide @alt rather only producing a warning - would you take it more 
seriously then?

I'm not open to act as if I agree if I don't agree: what I have said in 
the CP I can also say in a poll, and the chairs would then have to 
consider it.

Btw, strictly speaking, it is not currently (per the HTML5 spec) 
conforming to only provide @title *unless* the author unsuccessfully 
has put effort into creating @alt text. The main problem here, as I see 
it, is that it is entirely undiscoverable to anyone doing validation 
whether the author did so. Whether an error or warning, this creates 
opportunity to asses the quality more independent from the author's 
"efforts".
-- 
Leif H Silli
Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2011 15:29:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:38 GMT