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

Re: fear of "invisible metadata" [was Re: retention of summary attribute for TABLE element]

From: Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo <amla70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:22:23 +0200
Message-ID: <af2a8eab0706190722p63f81951q480cbc1742707674@mail.gmail.com>
To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
Cc: "James Graham" <jg307@cam.ac.uk>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>

LONGDESC is a good description of a contradiction. It's meant to
provide extra information about an image, but the fact is that no
visual UA supports it (AFAIK), and that means that if you provide it
so people with visual problems can get that extra information about
the image then you are depriving the rest of the people with that very
same info.

Is that logical?

So the solution is to wrap the image in a link so it points to the
extra info and everybody can access it. And in the end the existence
of such attribute isn't useful at all.

Am I wrong about this issue?


2007/6/19, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>:
>
> >> you wouldn't deprecate ALT or LONGDESC would you
> >
> > Actually, longdesc is not included in the current draft of HTML5. Are there a non-negligible number of sites that actually use longdesc in a useful way?
>
> For what its worth, I am not sure how useful LONGDESC actually is. In
> over two years of extensive user testing and my own work/research with
> my blind and visually impaired colleagues I have vary rarely (if ever)
> come across it. That not to say that it is not useful in its own right,
> I just haven't seen it.
>
> Josh
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 14:22:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:01 GMT