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

Re: Long descriptions spec - a basic idea

From: Leif H Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 19:23:48 +0200
To: john@foliot.ca
Cc: rubys@intertwingly.net, public-html-a11y@w3.org, fielding@gbiv.com
Message-ID: <7241923041.1032722628@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To avoid that confusion, I suggest to replace "ghetto" with "community". 
The RDFa + HTML spec is defined by the RDFa community. As our spec would be 
defined by the A11Y community.


------- Opprinnelig melding -------
> Fra: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> Til: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no, rubys@intertwingly.net
> Cc: public-html-a11y@w3.org, fielding@gbiv.com
> Sendt: 21/9/'12,  18:16
> Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> If Microdata and HTML+RDFa are ghetto specs, then I agree that ghetto
>> specs can work fine.
> The current proposed path has warranted some serious deliberation and 
> discussion, which is happening now.
> Culturally, I would caution that we collectively be very careful about 
> our use of terms such as "ghetto" with regard to accessibility and People 
> With Disabilities, and further I have some significant concerns about the 
> expression of any extension specification to HTML that has any kind of 
> appearance of marginalization.
> Put another way, both the RDFa spec and the MathML spec are (if I am to 
> understand the thrust of the larger idea) extensions to HTML5.  Yet we do 
> not highlight the inclusion of MathML to the spec in the same way that we 
> do RDFa. The absolutely last thing we need is to have is even an internal 
> notion of HTML+a11y (in the same way that we have HTML+RDFa), and so I 
> would suggest that one way we can avoid this is to be extremely careful in 
> our choice of words: casual observers may be lead to think something that 
> is not intended or true.
> Cheers!
> JF
Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 17:24:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:31 UTC