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

Re: LONGDESC vs D-link (was LONGDESC for OBJECT)

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 11:48:33 +1000 (EST)
To: WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980803114328.16702K-100000@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Daniel said my example is ridiculously complex. That's true. Where it 
would apply is to nested OBJECTs. The IMG might be a default for an 
image, rather than a wrapper OBJECT. 

I would prefer to push for OBJECT anyway. If LONGDESC is recommended 
practise for the future, D-link will continue to suffer. Since there is 
no real alternative in any UA so far, that seems unacceptable in the
short to medium term.

Daniel also thought we should drop the idea of using PARAM to provide a 
D-link/LONGDESC for OBJECT. I disagree. OBJECT is in such a prototype 
state at the moment that it we could implement it with very little legacy 
implication (by contrast to the LONGDESC/D-link case). And as an 
historian, I too like PARAM better than A REL="longdesc"


Charles McCN
Received on Sunday, 2 August 1998 22:11:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:58 GMT