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

RE: Okay, is this better?

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TraceCenter.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 14:14:26 -0600
Message-ID: <01BD598A.A6CDB560.GV@TraceCenter.org>
To: "'A.Flavell@physics.gla.ac.uk'" <A.Flavell@physics.gla.ac.uk>, Suzan Dolloff <averil@concentric.net>
Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
LONGDESC is designed to eventually replace the D link.   For awhile we may 
still need the D link til browsers support LONGDESC.  However, the 
information in the LONGDESC and D link should be identical.... Or rather I 
should say that they should both point to the exact same place & text.

Gregg
(Vanderheiden)

-----Original Message-----
From:	Alan J. Flavell [SMTP:flavell@a5.ph.gla.ac.uk]
Sent:	Wednesday, March 25, 1998 2:55 PM
To:	Suzan Dolloff
Cc:	w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject:	Re: Okay, is this better?

On Wed, 25 Mar 1998, Suzan Dolloff wrote:

> This well-designed and highly-accessible web site uses what's known as a 
D
> link, or "description." Clicking on a D link takes users to another web
> page which offers image or sound descriptions whose robust explanations
> aren't well served by ALT or TITLE or LONGDESC attributes.

Excuse me, I thought that LONGDESC was the properly engineered
attribute that was intended to replace the D-link kludge.

I mean no disrespect to the folks at wgbh, they did something that
needed doing, and did it with the tools at hand.  But a properly
engineered solution is still surely better?

best regards
Received on Friday, 27 March 1998 15:33:54 GMT

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