W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > August 2010

Re: longdesc URLs and RDFa

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 10:09:51 -0500
Message-ID: <4C66B1BF.2070807@aptest.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
(speaking with my PFWG member / liaison hat on)

While I agree that it would be interesting to extend our semantic 
interpretation capabilities to @longdesc (sort of like I have proposed 
with @role), I really don't think such an extension to RDFa should 
supplant nor supersede the fundamental requirement that HTML5 permit the 
annotation of images with extended semantics that are supported by user 

RDFa permits the definition of RDF-based semantics, but places no 
requirement on the user agent to interpret RDFa nor to do anything with 
such an interpretation.  I see these efforts as being complementary.  It 
would be great to create triples based upon these clearly defined 
relationships.  But such triples aren't a replacement for requiring that 
a user agent make the target of @longdesc navigable so that human users 
can find out what the heck an image is about.

 From an accessibility perspective, support for the generation of 
additional triples isn't really that useful now, and I don't see it 
being that useful in the near term.  Frankly, it is much easier to get 
the assistive technology vendors to support a long standing attribute 
with clear semantics (like @longdesc) than it would be to get them to 
add RDF processing to their tools.

On 8/14/2010 9:56 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> Ivan Herman, Sat, 14 Aug 2010 16:28:41 +0200:
>> On Aug 14, 2010, at 14:01 , Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> [snip] what this means is that the users would have to
>>>> manually write the<img>  elements the way I wrote them
>>>> up there.
>    [snip]
>> I am not sure I understand the question. What I tried to say is that
>> if the original HTML code contains
> That you said 'manually write the<img>  elements the way I wrote them'
> contributed to my confusion. ;-)
>> <img src="*" longdesc="long.html" alt="short description" />
>> then this could be replaced, conceptually or by some sort of a
>> preprocessor,
> OK. I see. Thanks.
>> by
>> <img src="i.src" rel="longdesc" resource="long.html" property="alt"
>> content="short description" />
>    [snip]

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Saturday, 14 August 2010 15:10:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:48 UTC