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

Re: Alternate proposal for ISSUE-30 longdesc

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:10:09 -0800
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, HTMLwg WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <AD68CDAD-1F64-4BDB-879D-7C4BBB8E65B6@apple.com>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>

On Feb 22, 2010, at 8:42 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:30:04 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak  
> <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Consolidating some replies...
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2010, at 6:12 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:44:37 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak
>>> <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/LongdescConformingWithWarning
>
>>> Unlike Hixie's proposal, I think that this proposal can turn into
>>> something I can support.
>>
>> Do you think changes are needed for you to feel comfortable  
>> supporting
>> it?
>
> Fundamentally it depends what the warning *says*

I think that would mostly be for validators to determine, rather than  
the spec. But the spec could give guidance. My proposal is that  
validators should encourage authors to consider alternatives to  
longdesc, most notably aria-describedby.

Do you have any other suggestions on what guidance the spec should  
give on the warning?

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 17:10:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:02 GMT