W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2012

Re: TF Teleconference Minutes for 26 April

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:22:23 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2k2odqnvr7H_O137tj1VxQXXbaS=uwqwK2XTxnd1Eumag@mail.gmail.com>
To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
>
> issue 203 deadline (Friday)
>
>   <JF> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposal/Issue203
>
>   <MikeSmith> janina: John needs help getting the details written
>
>   rich: So asking for longdesc not describedat?
>
>   jf: A mechanism for short and long text description?
>   ... Mechanisms we have now in HTML 5 are alt and (hopefully) longdesc -- noting the dependency on Issue-30
>
>   rich: What does alt do here with images turned off?
>   ... alt pertains to the video file, not the poster, correct?
>
>   jf: correct
>
>   rich: So alt is rendered with images off?
>
>   jf: Correct
>
>   rich: Doesn't title get rendered with images off?


Right now, in all of the browsers that I tested, turning images off
has no effect on the rendering of video. There is no way to turn off
video rendering in browsers right now.


>   jf: Quoting spec ... re a11y
>
>   janina: The thing that gets lost in these conversations is that when the video is not running it functions on screen as
>   a static image


No, it doesn't. It has video controls rendered and it is clear to
everyone that it is not an image but a video.


>   rich: Does this CP talk about that? Should it?
>   ... So, if images are turned off, user has contextual info about that video ...
>   ... Important that we don't want that rendered with video running
>   ... Needs to state somehwere that alt goes away when the video is triggered to run
>
>   jf: I need technical/editorial assistance to write this correctly
>
>   rich: Silvia?
>
>   jf: Silvia is adament that a transcript would suffice as a long description
>   ... believe the community would not accept that


No, that is not my position. My position is that we need
aria-describedAt and that the link that aria-describedAt links to can
present all the different types of long descriptions that are needed.
I still have to write a demonstrator of what I mean to make it clearer
what I mean.

But I do indeed believe that with aria-describedAt and aria-label,
aria-labelledby and aria-describedby we have short and long text
alternatives covered. I therefore don't subscribe to the need of issue
203.

Best Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Friday, 27 April 2012 08:23:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 08:23:17 GMT