W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2008

RE: question about the draft:

From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 00:28:06 -0400
To: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'Philip Taylor \(Webmaster, Ret'd\)'" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Cc: <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <063a01c8f6b3$a83f78d0$f8be6a70$@com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Ian Hickson
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:32 PM
> To: Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd)
> Cc: public-html@w3.org
> Subject: Re: question about the draft:
> 
> > If this assertion is true, why do you need "an appropriate HTML
> element"
> > when you can create a nonce-element using the very techniques you
> have
> > proposed ?
> 
> A "nonce-element" doesn't help screen readers. Screen readers only know
> real HTML elements, they don't know about the inventions of the author.
> Extensibility solutions don't help accessibility.

They do, *if* we provide a mechanism to tie semantics/accessibility to the
class.

J.Ja
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2008 04:29:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:57 UTC