RE: Alternate proposal for ISSUE-30 longdesc

Matt May wrote:
> On the proposal itself, I am, like Chaals, more positive about it than
> other proposals I've seen.
> 

I was preparing a longer response to this thread, but at this point in
time will opt instead of echoing both Chaals and Matt in saying that this
might be acceptable - like others I suspect that the devil will be in the
details - specifically the warning advisory that we issue to authors.
Phrased in the context that authors should be aware that there *might* be
a better technique to achieve this goal exists is an acceptable position.
However telling them that using @longdesc is *WRONG* would be unacceptable
IMHO.

JF