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

Re: 48-Hour Consensus Call: InstateLongdesc CP Update

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 11:07:57 +0100
Message-ID: <5059997D.5020907@cfit.ie>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> I did not have time too look through it, but those I looked at either
> contained only a "#" or they contained (another) image file. With
> regard to the first (#) then I agree "misinformed" about the potential
> negative effect. With regard to image URLs inside @longdesc, then there
> are image light box solutions - libraries - that  more or less
> consciously makes incorrect use of longdesc. (Today they would perhaps
> picked at @data-foo attribute instead - but that was not 'valid' then.)
> Of the few I scanned, no one contained text.

Yikes, maybe it is the former Silvia. Thanks for doing that Leif. It 
does therefore sound like an inappropriate sample population or at least 
partially so.


> However, there was an open
> source photo album CMS that, in an legacy version, inserted text into
> longdesc. That is to say: Some of the documented misuse seems to stem
> from CMSes and libraries that got it wrong.

Very interesting.

>And I imaging that  developers of CMSes and lightbox libraries would not have done such
> things if the negative effect could have been perceived by a browser
> that they themselves could use. = It is very important with
> implementation.

Very good point.
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 10:08:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 September 2012 10:08:33 GMT