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

Re: FORMAL OBJECTION (was RE: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-204 aria-hidden)

From: Chaals McCathieNevile <w3b@chaals.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 20:04:48 +0200
To: public-html@w3.org, "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>
Message-ID: <op.wi3giaq422x22q@chaals.local>
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 02:47:54 +0200, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

> On Aug 14, 2012, at 19:39 , John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:
>> And this is where there is a difference today: some (many?) tools HAVE  
>> adopted and support @longdesc - and tools that far transcend screen  
>> readers alone (for example, content authoring tools). But a small group  
>> of engineers have it in their minds that @longdesc must go, and are  
>> willing to swallow any hand-waving imagineering and "suggestions on how  
>> it might work" tomorrow, in their fevered push to oust @longdesc at all  
>> costs today.
> Another plea for more temperate language.

And another.

> Generally I reckon those using intemperate language to be the ones who
> are 'fevered', and discount accordingly.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In this case I happen to agree with those who  
assert that the situation has been misinterpreted, leading to the wrong  
decision. But escalating the pitch doesn't improve the signal:noise ratio,  
and makes people shy about attaching their names to a position where  
people have made the same calculation Dave describes.


Chaals - standards declaimer
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 18:05:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:30 UTC