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

Re: why are we pursuing this idea? (was: Implementation Details request on Issue 204 Decision)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:23:57 +0200
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Chaals McCathieNevile <w3b@chaals.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120822002357291779.e968cbfe@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Steve Faulkner, Tue, 21 Aug 2012 22:40:22 +0100:
 
>> Given that Steve’s focus on A11Y APIs, then I don't understand that he
>> mention this statement by NVDA developer James Teh.
> 
> if you read back in the thread you will see it was in response to
> chaals asking me for a reference to my previous statement:
> 
> "I also think that some AT will simply not implement the rich hidden
> content model as described, The NVDA developers have not implemented
> longdesc due to it having no visible UI (for example)."
> 
> in other words it doesn't help to have stuff exposed by browsers if AT
> don't make use of it.

Sorry. My point was only that Firefox implements @longdesc. And thus, 
that NVDA doesn't implement it because Firefox does not implement it, 
makes little sense to me. Unless NVDA relies on 'visible UI' rather 
than accessibility API, that is.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 22:24:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 21 August 2012 22:24:34 GMT