W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: ISSUE-30 counter-proposal

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:17:14 +0100
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <20100215221714589519.f90c2e72@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Sam Ruby, Mon, 15 Feb 2010 13:36:23 -0500:
> Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> Ian Hickson, Sun, 14 Feb 2010 08:54:07 +0000 (UTC):
>>   [...]
>>> == Rationale ==
>>> 
>>> Several studies have been performed. They have shown that:
>>   [...]
>>> * Most users (more than 90%) don't want the interaction model that 
>>> longdesc="" implies. 
>>> [http://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey2/#images]
>> 
>> You don't find basis in that survey for saying the above. And I said 
>> in November [1] that I fail to see how that survey undermines 
>> @longdesc.
>> 
>> Here is why:
> 
> I'd like to ask that people only post if they had new information to 
> add.

Well, I say thank you for that characterisation of my message. On the 
good side, I feel that I am in the same both as Ian there.

> The goal here is to keep the list from being bogged down by long 
> threads that don't seem to be producing good results.
> 
> My suggestion at this time is that people focus either on advocating 
> updates to one of the existing proposals regarding issue 30:
> 
> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ChangeProposals/longdesc
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0393.html
> 
> ... or stating their intent to produce another proposal.

One of the possible outcomes that you listed in your reply to Ian's 
counter proposal, was discussion. 

It would certainly be new info for me if Ian told us how he links 
WebAIMs survey to his counter proposal. To that end, I have tried to 
show the ways that it does not support his proposal.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 15 February 2010 21:17:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:14 UTC