W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

Chairs: Request for consideration (Issue 122)

From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
To: <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009d01cbeab7$0ea7e4f0$2bf7aed0$@edu>


It appears that I have missed a deadline by roughly 2.5 hours (welcome to
the West Coast), however I request that my objection to "Change Proposal
to permit authors to provide text alternatives for images considered to
enhance the themes or subject matter of a page"
(http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/thematicimages) be
considered in your deliberations on the Straw Poll for Issue 122




Both Change Proposal's under consideration rely on the current author
guidance text here: 



...text that is taken from the document the second Change Proposal
references here:

"Exceptions to this rule, in cases where CSS cannot be used to display an
entirely decorative image, are covered by the HTML5: Techniques for
providing useful text alternatives. [HTML ALT TECHS:



Either way, the appropriate author guidance is originating from the same
source today.


I am confident that either proposal meets our greater need, and further
support the proposed guidance text; author guidance that will be
maintained within WAI. However I also strongly believe in modularization
as a better way of maintaining the web incrementally, as well as support
moving *all* author guidance for accessibility into a stand-alone
document, which is what Greg's proposal suggests (and for which Steve is
editor). If author guidance can be in a document smaller than the omnibus
HTML5, making modifications and changes there (if required) would be
significantly easier than reworking the larger HTML5 standard.


The second proposal
proposes this, whilst the first extracts text from "HTML5: Techniques for
providing useful text alternatives" and directly inserts it into HTML5
"The Standard". While this may prove to be harmless over the long run,
there is also a risk that the guidance may become outdated or changed in
the future, with the potential of having contradictory texts in different
locations. The risk is small, but exists.


I object then to the first proposal
(http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/thematicimages) based on
this possible risk.




John  Foliot

Program Manager

Stanford Online Accessibility Program

http://soap.stanford.edu <http://soap.stanford.edu/>  

Stanford University

Tel: 650-469-5785



Co-chair - W3C HTML5 Accessibility Task Force (Media)




Received on Friday, 25 March 2011 06:37:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:11 UTC