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

Re: the market hasn't spoken - it hasn't bothered to listened

From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:39:30 +0300
Message-Id: <p062408d1c2a94ddf2d83@[]>
To: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

At 9:23  +0100 28/06/07, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
>Therefore I support those who advocate
>ensuring that a textual (or aural, or braille, or whatever)
>description of a /summary/ of the video content be required
>as an child-element or attribute of whatever element is used
>to embed the video.

I agree with the sentiment, but I think making it a requirement is at 
best ineffective, and at worst counter-productive.  Having 
"accessibility stuff for conformance" as the annotation is not an 
improvement over not having it at all;  and indeed, it might make 
accessibility worse.  How?  Well, user agents might do something 
intelligently assistive if the annotation is detectably absent, but 
are unlikely to detect the case when it is present but worthless.
David Singer
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 11:41:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:22 UTC