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

Re: 48-Hour Consensus Call: InstateLongdesc CP Update

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 11:02:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpveyUgYJuFUcb_jJzcPVxjm1t4vDgXwP8B1zuOPZkkoNrQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Hi Sam,

> I will repeat that the option of a survey is currently out of the HTML WG
> chairs hands at the moment[1], though we are actively working to resolve
> that.

Thank you. Please do not delay ISSUE-30 further. Please do expedite it
as the Chairs committed to in May 2011.

>> With the exception of Janina spotting two typos and Chaals offering
>> some thoughts for improvement for the overlay text, this thread has
>> rehashed the same discussion that has taken place since 2007. No new
>> information has been offered. What do you consider new information,
>> Sam?

I will note you did not answer the question.

> I think the crucial question is the one that John Foliot posed: does the
> Change Proposal "mandate something that browsers will continue ignore"?

On May 5 Maciej stated,
"if a UA can give a better experience i think they should be
encouraged to try" [1]. To help browser vendors in this effort, new
text has been specified for the 10.6.1 rendering section. which
illustrates how longdesc can be made discoverable. It will encourage
them to improve support. As Anne van Kesteren has said, examples in
the specification serve as an incentive to vendors:
"It's an incentive to get the software fixed."

> I think that the path forward is to, as John Foliot stated, "actively engage
> them in crafting the solution".

The solution already exists. They just need to implement it.

> Richard mentioned three individuals, one of which is actively participating
> here.  Given that widespread adoption is something that we all should be
> seeking, I would be interested in what they have to say. One of which has
> posted here previously[3] on this very subject.

David's help in implementing longdesc would be great.

> Telling people that their input is "unacceptable as previously
> discussed." is most decidedly NOT the best way to actively engage others in
> crafting a solution, and is not the way this Task Force should be operating.

Discussion Guidelines:
"It's inappropriate to repeat the same argument over and over without
adding new information." [3]

Best Regards,

[3] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/DiscussionGuidelines

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 16:03:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:30 UTC