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

Re: Process objections to FPWD

From: Matthew Turvey <mcturvey@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:38:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFp5+Aqh2TJVZVRkkqeBTY75uY_ZTpS_a0N7r7NwNmJ9zFy+KQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Another potential compromise solution for consensus would be to spec
longdesc as "obsolete but conforming", i.e. effectively "deprecated".
This option has previously received some support in the TF and HTMLWG:

In the HTML-A11Y-TF's original poll:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Apr/0180.html

Richard and Judy:
http://www.w3.org/2011/04/18-text-minutes.html

Janina:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2012Mar/0014.html

Steve:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2012Mar/0031.html

Cynthia
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Sep/0289.html

James:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Nov/0151.html

Me:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jun/0254.html

Since the HTML5 spec already requires UAs to expose longdesc [1] this
option would just result in validators issuing a warning instead of an
error. I think this approach would provide better advice to authors
and is more likely to gain consensus in the HTMLWG.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html#dom-img-longdesc

-Matt
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 18:39:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 December 2012 18:39:10 GMT