W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: Is it a problem that WCAG 2.0 doesn't require paying attention to NOFRAME content?

From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 17:06:47 +0200
Message-ID: <44D75707.9060406@w3development.de>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org

Bailey, Bruce schrieb:
>> longdesc attribute on FRAME elements was [...] dropped for XHTML.
> 
> Okay, so I am poorly paraphrasing what we have in Appendix D:
> <blockquote>
> because the longdesc attribute type on the frame element type has not been supported and is not defined in XHTML 1.1, the Working Draft of XFrames, or the Working Draft of XHTML 2.0)
> </blockquote>

To Appendix D authors:
XHTML 1.1 does not contain the frame/frameset/iframe elements, because 
it is basically a modularized version of XHTML 1.0 Strict. Neither does 
XHTML 2.0 contain anything frames-related. And the XFrames WD was not 
updated since 2002.

I would not use this to argue against a requirement to use longdesc for 
conformance.

If there is a need for describing the purpose of frames and their 
relationship, there should be a way to do this
a) in markup languages that know the frames concept, and
b) with user agents that don't implement frame/@longdesc?
If there is no need (any more), please clarify why.

-- 
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
                             (Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Received on Monday, 7 August 2006 15:07:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:46 GMT