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: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:22:29 -0700
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
Message-id: <AE275749-9669-49C8-A5B9-4CDD6E529159@apple.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>

On Sep 19, 2012, at 4:12 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:

> James Craig, Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:50:43 -0700:
>> On Sep 17, 2012, at 1:56 AM, Leif Halvard Silli 
>> <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> As long as it doesn't auto-play, I don't see any problem with 
>> including audio or video content.
> 
> So there you confirm one limitation.

Touché.

> Also, you did not comment on the link (or interactive content - 
> audio/video are not interactive content, per HTML5). 

I'm working through the past several days' list of replies as quickly as I can. It's been a pretty busy week so far. ;-)

James
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 23:23:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 September 2012 23:23:00 GMT