Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-30 longdesc

Hi,

for me the only relevant information is
* How many and which assistive technologies are using longdesc (full
browser, OS level, plugin, etc.)?

In other case it's not because there is lot of bad products out there that
the HTML specification must  validate this mediocrity.
At this time accessibility isn't a mass market marketing features and a
majority of the authoring tools and CMS doesn't care about accessibility at
all. For search engine I really doubt that Google or Microsoft will respond
me if I ask them how they handle the longdesc in their indexation algorithm.

Aurélien Levy

2010/8/13 Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net <karl%2Bw3c@la-grange.net>>

>
> Le 12 août 2010 à 02:41, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
> > (2) New information that could lead to the issue being reopened.
>
> "New information" is too vague. Given the strong opinion that some HTML WG
> Members have on hard data, I would encourage the proponent of longdesc
> attribute to collect these data.
>
> * How many and which authoring tools give a UI for editing longdesc?
> * How many and which CMSes give a UI for editing longdesc?
> * How many and which search engines use and/or associate longdesc to the
> original document it has been linked from?
> * How many and which assistive technologies are using longdesc (full
> browser, OS level, plugin, etc.)?
>
> This information would create raw materials helping the discussion.
>
>
> --
> Karl Dubost
> Montréal, QC, Canada
> http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
>
>
>