W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: Short and long descriptions for links

From: david poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:10:49 -0500
Message-ID: <003401c4e766$e05abd20$6401a8c0@DAVIDPC>
To: <david@dorward.me.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

yes, we are given the option of navigatiing to the long desc, but the reason 
for turning off title would most likely be the foul ways in which it is used 
or in the case of a situation where title is not available we still need a 
way of getting that information which I am afraid is either a block of text 
<short block of text> or information in the anchor its self.  Advisory is 
not descriptive so the only way to describe an image is to use either the d 
link and or the long desc.  So, you wanna tool tip?

Johnnie Apple Seed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Dorward" <david@dorward.me.uk>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: Short and long descriptions for links



On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 05:35:23AM -0500, Matthew J. Giustino wrote:

>  Lets say for that the ( screen reader ) user did in fact set the
>  screen reader settings to NOT announce a link "title". I would
>  argue that the user turned off the title announcement setting for a
>  reason, why then should they be forced to listen to a "longdesc" ?

It was my understanding[1] that screen readers supporting longdesc
would (if suitablely configured) inform the user that such a
description existed and allow them to access it by pressing a key
(spacebar in JAWS IIRC).

It would be, IMO, very poor usability to automatically switch to a
different document and start describing an image in what could be many
paragraphs of detail.

[1] I'm remembering this from a conversation quite some time ago, so
please forgive (and correct) any mistakes I might make.

-- 
David Dorward                                      http://dorward.me.uk
Received on Tuesday, 21 December 2004 14:11:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:18 GMT