W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2007

Re: html 5 and accessibility issue

From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 07:41:44 +0200
Message-Id: <p062406c1c2acea190c07@[192.168.0.102]>
To: public-html@w3.org

At 14:23 +1000 UTC, on 2007-07-01, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

[...]

> You are incorrectly assuming that a textual alternative is needed to
> make content accessible.

Would you mind sharing what the correct assumption would be then?

I tend to use the term "textual alternative" because "fallback" appears to
confuse people about what the alt attribute is for. FWIW, Adobe speaks of
"text equivalents":
<http://www.adobe.com/resources/accessibility/flash8/author.html>.

> Try doing some research into how formats like
> Flash, PDF and other plugins have incorporated accessibility features
> directly in themselves.

That would certainly be interesting. Any pointers much appreciated. But I
don't see how the features of individual plugins apply to the generic
"plugins".

If it's guaranteed that every file format that can be provided through
<embed> will allow authors to provide a decent fallback/textual
equivalent/alternative, then the only need for <embed> itself to allow for
its own fallback/textual equivalent/alternative would be if we consider that
necessary for cases where the resource cannot be loaded.


-- 
Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Sunday, 1 July 2007 05:42:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:46 UTC