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

Re: My case for the obsoletion of longdesc (Was: 48-Hour Consensus Call: InstateLongdesc CP Update)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 10:56:19 +0200
To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
Message-ID: <20120917105619747934.792e7ee0@xn--mlform-iua.no>
James Craig, Sat, 15 Sep 2012 02:29:48 -0700:
> To the best of my knowledge, one of these approaches (the iframe 
> example listed at http://cookiecrook.com/longdesc/iframe/) works in 
> all major implementations today, which is to say that it is much 
> better supported than longdesc itself. 

One problem with the <iframe> approach (and one that I by accident 
experienced with fiddling your solution), is that it puts some 
limitations on what the content of the long description can - or should 
- be. For example, imagine that it the description were to contain 
interactive content or audio/video.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 17 September 2012 08:56:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 September 2012 08:56:53 GMT