- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 20:54:34 -0400
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>
Henry: Henri Sivonen writes: > Do you really not understand this distinction? Do you really think > this is about making things nicer to validator users? After all these > permathreads? Even if you disagree about what markup generator > developers would do or disagree that what they would do would be worse > for accessibility, I think it's totally counterproductive to > mischaracterize what this discussion is about. > Call me dense if you must, but I don't see there's anything here about a11y. Nor do I see a11y people suggesting there's an a11y issue here. So, Henry, if it's not about validators and their use, then let's undo the ill-advised meta generator decision and go on to important business. There's no a11y issue here. There's no way that identifying what image may have been injected vs one that was "hand" authored. From the a11y point of view, that's the classic distinction without a difference. Janina -- Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net Email: janina@rednote.net The Linux Foundation Chair, Open Accessibility: http://a11y.org The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Chair, Protocols & Formats http://www.w3.org/wai/pf Indie UI http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/
Received on Friday, 3 August 2012 00:55:15 UTC