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

Re: html 5 and accessibility issue

From: aurélien levy <aurelien.levy@free.fr>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:07:24 +0200
Message-ID: <468671AC.3020703@free.fr>
To: public-html@w3.org


>> - dt/dd need a reel relationship like the for attribut on label 
>> mechanism
> Why is there a need for this? The specification defines exactly what 
> the relationship is between them. Much like HTML4 did.
because actually i can do :

<dl>
 <dt> 1st terme </dt>
 <dd> 1st terme description </dd>
 <dd> 2nd terme description </dd>
 <dt> 2nd terme </dt>
 <dt> 3rd terme</dt>
 <dd> 3rd terme description</dd>
</dl>

with no way for AT to know that 2nd terme description is actually the 
2nd terme description and not the second description of the first terme
>> - actually their is no fallback content for embed element
> Why is that needed for plugins?
maybe i misunderstand the function of the embed element. Is this just a 
way to link to the plugins ? or a way to use it to show some content 
like the object element
>> - the only fallback content for iframe elements is pure text, i think 
>> we need to authorize an "a" element to link to the content of the iframe
> Doesn't the <iframe> do that already? I'm not sure <iframe> needs 
> "fallback" content at all.
I don't know if all UA do that but it's not the actual spec
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/frames.html#edef-IFRAME
If all the UA do that, it's no enough to just say there is no need to 
author fallback, i think we need to say that this fallback content is 
given by the UA  with something like  IFRAME: "content of the src 
attribut on the iframe element"
Received on Saturday, 30 June 2007 15:07:43 GMT

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