W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns

From: John Foliot - WATS.ca <foliot@wats.ca>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:02:48 -0800
To: "'Sam Ruby'" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "'Rob Sayre'" <rsayre@mozilla.com>
Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'W3C WAI-XTECH'" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Message-ID: <017701c996ed$28841490$798c3db0$@ca>
Sam Ruby wrote:
> I don't think it (@alt) is resolved, but too I don't see a proposal.
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31

There have been numerous proposals, none of which seem palpable to Ian to
date, although my suggestion of April 2008 looked remarkably like Ian's
Option F of August 2008:
"The current wording in the editor's draft is Option F (a variation of
Foliot's proposal)."

There are a number of suggestions/proposals in that wiki that Ian
unilaterally dismissed without (IMHO) a full and open airing of the ideas.
Although since his current suggestion is indeed very similar to one that I
floated, I personally am on the fence for the most part. 

> That's a bit more than I said.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Feb/0091.html

Sam, if I mis-read or spoke out of turn, then I apologize.  This was my
interpretation of your statement:
"And in the case of alt, the right baby step might very well be to continue
to make it required unconditionally."

Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 02:03:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:42 UTC