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

Re: longdesc quality statistics

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 21:47:38 -0400
Message-ID: <505E6A3A.3050102@intertwingly.net>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, 'David Singer' <singer@apple.com>, 'Charles McCathie Nevile' <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 09/22/2012 09:13 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> Sam Ruby, Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:21:09 -0400:
>> On 09/22/2012 05:36 PM, John Foliot wrote:
>>> David Singer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But.
>>>>
>>>> a) why would anyone now implement longdesc knowing that the
>>>> descriptions that they'd expose to users were, for the vast majority,
>>>> 'hopelesslt bad'?
>>>
>>> 1) There is no other functional replacement in effect today.
>>
>> The keyword being 'today'.
>>
>> I'll point out that there is a false dichotomy in play here.
>>
>> Today there is only one mainstream browser that natively implements
>> longdesc.
>
> What do you mean by saying that only one 'natively implements'?

http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/research/ld-rendering2.html

> For mainstream browsers, the situation is:
>
> 1. Firefox has support in its A11Y API
> 2. Opera has contextual menu support.
> 3. Internet Explorer has A11Y API support (but
>     I have heard that it is buggy).

Any possibility that the proposal can be updated to NOT define the user 
agents in 1 and 3 above as not meeting expectations?

- Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 23 September 2012 01:48:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 23 September 2012 01:48:09 GMT