W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 1998

RE: Using longdesc for FRAMES

From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 22:25:25 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980312222525.00977be0@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 06:26 PM 12/03/98 -0800, Charles (Chuck) Oppermann wrote:
>This seems silly to me – the purpose of LONGDESC is to provide a place for
>HTML markup.  Both FRAMESET and OBJECT allow you to put as much markup in
>them as you want.

As does IFRAME, but it has a LONGDESC attribute.

>Thus, no need for LONGDESC.

That depends on what the purpose of LONGDESC really is.  To me, LONGDESC
for IMG is a long description of the image--a nice implementation of the
"D-link".  This is very different than with the OBJECT or IFRAME element,
where the element content provides a *replacement* (not a description) of
the object or inline frame.

I don't see the point to a LONGDESC attribute on FRAMESET.  The TITLE
attribute on FRAMEs should be sufficient to give the contextual
relationship among the frames.  If the relationship cannot be expressed in
a few plain text words, then I suspect it's too complicated for any user,
sighted or otherwise.

If LONGDESC for IMG is indeed a long description of the image, as I believe
it should be, then OBJECT should also have a LONGDESC attribute--provided
we accept that the content of OBJECT is a replacement rather than a
description, which is really the only sensible way to interpret an OBJECT
within an OBJECT.

--
Liam Quinn
Web Design Group            Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development
http://www.htmlhelp.com/    http://enhanced-designs.com/
Received on Thursday, 12 March 1998 22:23:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:57 GMT