- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:05:18 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Tue, 13 Apr 2010, Janina Sajka wrote: > > RESOLUTION: While the HTML-A11Y Task Force prefers the proposal that > restores longdesc without warning we are prepared to accept the > alternative proposal at > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/LongdescConformingWithWarning > to produce a warning (assuming we can agree to warning text) > > RATIONALE: In reaching this consensus the Face to Face meeting > considered and agreed to the following resolutions of principle: > > RESOLUTION: There is a need for some mechanism that supports longer > descriptions. That seems uncontroversial. > RESOLUTION: People agree to have in page descriptions. This also. > RESOLUTION: Group agrees that we should have out of page > descriptions, but has concerns about its implementation. Ok... > RESOLUTION: The group wants longdesc to continue in HTML 5. This seems like a non-sequitur. What's the rationale for this position? It doesn't seem to follow from the previous ones. > RESOLUTION: The group does NOT want longdesc to continue indefinitely > in future versions of HTML, although some people objected to this > decision. Why would we want to drop it in a future version but not this version? It would be helpful to make clear the criteria under which we would consider longdesc="" suitable for removal. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 21:05:46 UTC