- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 19:09:55 -0400
- To: Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>
- Cc: public-html-a11y@w3.org
Dear Joanmarie Diggs and Alejandro Piņeiro: Thank you for your comments on the Candidate Recommendation (CR) publication of HTML5 Image Description Extension (longdesc) [1] as provided in your email archived at [2] and further explained in your email at [3]. The HTML-A11Y Task Force has reviewed all comments received on the draft. We would like to know whether we have understood your comments correctly and whether you are satisfied with our resolutions. Note that we have numbered your comments in order to aid in the discussion of your individual points. Please review our resolutions for your comments, and reply to us as soon as possible to say whether you accept them or to discuss additional concerns you have with our response. If we do not hear from you by 9 September, we will mark your comment as "no response" and close it. You can respond by email by replying to this message. Note that if you still strongly disagree with our resolution on an issue, you have the opportunity to file a formal objection (according to 3.3.2 of the W3C Process [4]. Formal objections will be reviewed during the transition meeting with the W3C Director, unless we can come to agreement with you on a resolution in advance of the meeting. Joanmarie Diggs writes: > ... Below please find text Igalia would like you to consider incorporating > into the specification. > YOUR COMMENT #1: > Proposed Additions to "3.0.2 Authors" > > * Authors MUST NOT rely solely on longdesc as the means to provide > access to information which is essential for the user. DISPOSITION: Not accepted Whether a longdesc is essential or nonessential will depend on circumstance. It will vary among users, and will even vary for the same user given different circumstances. The point of the longdesc feature is to make it easy for the user to access that information, or to readily skip past it as their needs of the moment may dictate. YOUR COMMENT #2 > * When the description is part of the target document, authors SHOULD > NOT rely upon assistive technologies to constrain presentation of the > description to that fragment. If such restriction is essential, > authors MUST take additional means to mark surrounding content as > hidden. DISPOSITION: Not accepted While we appreciate the concern regarding content in fragment IDs, this is a well-known failing of HTML fragment IDs in general. This specification is not the appropriate place to attempt remedies. In particular we do not want to encourage hiding text, since it is very often done in such a way as to make it inaccessible - for example to people who are not using a screenreader but have+some other accessibility requirement or preference. Your concerns are, however, appropriate for discussion in future authoring guidance and will be forwarded accordingly. YOUR COMMENT #3 > Proposed Changes to "3.0.3 User Agents" > > Current: > > If the longdesc value is valid, User agents must make the link > available to all users through the regular user interface(s). > > Issue: > > One way to achieve the above is via the right-click menu. Firefox > does this. It works well for sighted users who can use a mouse. > It works well with the Orca screen reader which makes it possible > for the user to move to the image and then synthesize a right > click. But the image with a longdesc is likely not going to be > focusable, so keyboard-only users cannot navigate to it, which > is necessary prior to bringing up the context menu via the keyboard. > > Proposed modification to the above: > > ... including users who cannot use a mouse and do not use any > assistive technologies. > DISPOSITION: Not accepted We consider it counterproductive to attempt to prescribe user agent behavior beyond the general requirement to support "all users." Rather, we rely on other W3C guidelines, particularly the WAI User Agent Accessibility Guidelines, to further explain how this provision can be met. YOUR COMMENT #4 > Other additions: > > If the longdesc value is valid, user agents MUST make activation > of the link possible via the platform's accessible action interface > on platforms where such an interface is present. DISPOSITION: Accepted We have edited the specification to provide a more generic statement as follows: Normative: "If the longdesc value is valid, User agents must expose the longdesc to relevant APIs, especially accessibility-oriented APIs in a manner most appropriate to the API." Informative "What is most appropriate to an API will vary with the individual API. Some APIs (like MSAA) will need the text string which constitutes the URL of the longdesc. Other APIs may provide an actionable interface." YOUR COMMENT #5 > When the description is only part of the target document, user > agents MUST provide a means to return to the image being described > via the platform's accessibility API. DISPOSITION Not accepted As noted above, issues with fragment IDs are well known for HTML generally. It is thus beyond the scope of this specification to improve the specification of fragment ID expected behavior. But, as before, describing the issues and suggesting best practices is clearly appropriate for authoring guidance and we will forward this concern accordingly. > Thank you in advance for your time and consideration of these issues. > --Joanmarie Diggs and Alejandro Piņeiro > Thank you for your time reviewing and sending comments on your experience and observations implementing this specification for Orca. Though we cannot always do exactly what each commenter requests, all of the comments are valuable to the specification development process. Regards, Janina Sajka, for the HTML-A11Y Task Force Co-Facilitators [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html-longdesc-20140812/ [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Aug/0029.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html-longdesc-20140812/ [4] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#WGArchiveMinorityViews) -- Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net Email: janina@rednote.net Linux Foundation Fellow Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Chair, Protocols & Formats http://www.w3.org/wai/pf Indie UI http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2014 23:11:07 UTC