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

Re: Issue 31c: Meta generator

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 13:10:54 -0400
Message-ID: <4FB6829E.30903@intertwingly.net>
To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
CC: 'Julian Reschke' <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, 'Steve Faulkner' <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, 'Judy Brewer' <jbrewer@w3.org>, 'HTML Accessibility Task Force' <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, 'HTMLWG WG' <public-html@w3.org>
On 05/18/2012 12:07 PM, John Foliot wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> It seems to me that it's obvious that if de facto all non-hand authored
>> pages do not need to provide @alt, then some of them will fail to supply
>> @alt unintentionally.
>
> A reasonable conclusion.

Clearly people within the working group disagree as to what is "obvious" 
to them.

> And yet because there is no conclusive proof[1]
>
> [1: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012May/0094.html]

You are actively misrepresenting what is being requested.  Please go 
back and re-read the email that you cite.  In particular, the word 
"conclusive" appears nowhere in that email.

> (Or as I told a friend the other day, "...So because we have no *actual
> proof* that giving a running chain-saw to a 6-year old is a dumb idea, let's
> go ahead and give running chain-saws to 6-year olds...")

Ratchet the rhetoric down.  It isn't helpful.  Consider this to be a 
public warning[2].

- Sam Ruby

[2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ListGuidelines
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 17:11:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 18 May 2012 17:11:30 GMT