W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > January 2016

Re: code samples for extended description

From: Liam R. E. Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 18:35:10 -0500
Message-ID: <1452641710.29419.32.camel@w3.org>
To: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" <tsiegman@wiley.com>
Cc: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>, "DPUB mailing list (public-digipub-ig@w3.org)" <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
On Tue, 2016-01-12 at 21:16 +0000, White, Jason J wrote:
> > On Jan 12, 2016, at 14:57, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wile
> > y.com> wrote:
> > 
> > One of the issues that we have not fully resolved is that,
> > especially when using <details> and <summary>, there is nothing to
> > indicate to users that the content is a description.


> This can be solved today by providing suitable text in the SUMMARY
> element, as your examples demonstrate. I wouldn’t be opposed to a new
> ArIA property, but I suspect the need for it is overestimated.

I worry first that it's hard enough to get people to add image
descriptions; do you think people would actually put appropriate text?
In addition, how will people who see the images feel about the text?
It'd be irritating reading an exam paper if seven out of eight images
had "details" that said things like, "a red disc to the left of a solid
green triangle" and one said "Corfe castle was built on a steep hill,
an example of an early anti-helicopter system" and you needed that
information to answer the question. So it works both ways.

> I tested the examples successfully in Safari/VoiceOver under OS X.

Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2016 23:35:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:22 UTC