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

Re: Process objections to FPWD

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 23:22:20 +0100
To: "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.wow1riipy3oazb@chaals.local>
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 19:38:41 +0100, Matthew Turvey <mcturvey@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> 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:

Please file a bug on the spec proposing this change, if you actually want  
it.

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=HTML%20WG&amp;component=HTML%20Image%20Description%20Extension

cheers

Chaals

> 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
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 22:22:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 December 2012 22:22:57 GMT