- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 03:18:49 +0100
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, singer@apple.com, janina@rednote.net, rubys@intertwingly.net, laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com, mjs@apple.com, paul.cotton@microsoft.com, public-html-a11y@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
Silvia Pfeiffer, Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:26:14 +1100: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> If there - for the video element - is such a congruency between the >> aria-label and the video poster, then doesn't that imply that the >> @aria-label should describe, not the video, but the poster image? > > It's a transitive relationship: the @aria-label describes the poster > which describes the video, therefore @aria-label describes the video. You make it seem obvious that @aria-label describes the video poster. And not the video. It is obvious also because no one can 'see' the video, until it has started rolling. But that does perhaps not make it less important with a long description link? > Also, I don't think we need to discuss this any more. It's already > escalated to formal objection from issue 142. > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/142 At least it should be described somewhere, how to use @aria-label with video. -- Leif H Silli
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 02:19:25 UTC