Re: disposition of ISSUE 30 cited in bug 10967 insufficient

Sam Ruby writes:
> I will state that I expect every bit of evidence presented below to
> be challenged, and I expect that evidence and suggestions will be
> provided which leads to a different conclusion.  Without hearing
> that evidence, I will not commit to an answer.
> 
> I will also repeat my concern that should the evidence provided end
> up falling short, the chairs will likely be looking for something
> substantially more evidence to be provided before we even consider
> reopening the discussion yet again.  That's why I counsel patience.
> 
> Given these factors, I encourage those on this list to coordinate in
> order to determine when they would like to proceed with a discussion
> on public-html.
> 
I expect most individuals cc'd in this email thread are aware that PF
plans to bring this issue up in the A11Y TF. I will, in fact, add it to
our agenda for this Thursday's telecon. However, the agenda is already
very full, and we may well not get to this question this week.

I would also remind us that we have action items in PF aimed at building
the case for a longdesc reconsideration. Hopefully, we can close on
those this week. Regardless of that, though, Laura's excellent evidence
gathering, while invaluable, is imho insufficient on its own
I would also remind us that we have action items in PF aimed at building
the case for a longdesc reconsideration. Hopefully, we can close on
those this week. Regardless of that, though, Laura's excellent evidence
gathering, while invaluable, is imho insufficient on its own. It's part
of the story--not the whole story.

Short Summary: I'd like us to proceed systematically, without blocking
other work. We've a particularly full plate right now, much of it
needing to have been concluded yesterday. So, it's nice to see this
email thread, but it's also disconcerting to see assigned actions
languishing while people debate and promote longdesc.

Janina


> - Sam Ruby
> 
> On 11/30/2010 06:51 PM, John Foliot wrote:
> >Sam Ruby wrote:
> >>
> >>Revisiting this Issue
> >>
> >>This issue can be reopened if new information come up. Examples of
> >>possible relevant new information include:
> >>
> >>      * use cases that specifically require longdesc,
> >>      * evidence that correct usage is growing rapidly and that that
> >>        growth is expected to continue, or
> >>      * widespread interoperable implementation.
> >>
> >>I believe that Laura is collecting this information.  The advice that
> >>both I and Maciej gave in September on this topic is still relevant
> >>today:
> >>
> >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Sep/0495.html
> >>
> >>- Sam Ruby
> >
> >Sam,
> >
> >On August 12th, I wrote to the Chairs and asked for clarification on these
> >three points
> >(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0045.html,
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0047.html)
> >without getting much of a quantitive response back. The questions are/were:
> >
> >>      * use cases that specifically require longdesc,
> >
> >1) How many use cases are required?
> >
> >
> >Sam, your response then was:
> >
> >"The assumption of metrics was something you inferred.
> >
> >My suggestion on the way forward is to start with a single step.  Such
> >as a widespread implementation.  I've heard second hand that Oracle is
> >such a user.  If they could be encouraged to present their use case
> >directly, and preferably with samples of web pages (sanitized snapshots
> >would be fine if we are talking about intranet applications), then the
> >members of the working group can discuss whether the pros and cons of
> >that usage."
> >- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Aug/0054.html
> >
> >That proof has been collected and submitted:
> >http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/LongdescRetention#Examples_with_Redundant_Link_Text
> >
> >
> >Does this meet your criteria for use-cases "that specifically require
> >longdesc"? If not, why not?
> >(It must certainly meet the first-step recommendation of gathering and
> >sharing the Oracle data)
> >
> >
> >>      * evidence that correct usage is growing rapidly and that that
> >>        growth is expected to continue,
> >
> >2) Define "rapid", define "growth" in the context of satisfying this
> >requirement.
> >
> >
> >* Since the decision of August, a plug-in for WordPress was developed to
> >allow authors to insert longdesc
> >(2010-9-26 http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/tags/longdesc).
> >
> >* Drupal 7 will be officially released December 7th with support for
> >authoring and storing longdesc data in that CMS:
> >"Has been added to D7, no plans to backport for now."
> >http://drupal.org/node/801584
> >http://drupal7releasedate.com/
> >
> >
> >Does this meet your criteria for both "rapid" and "growth"?  If not, why
> >not?
> >
> >
> >
> >>      * widespread interoperable implementation.
> >
> >3) Define "widespread"
> >
> >This has always been the fox in the hen-house, as for the most part the
> >GUI-based browser vendors have shown little appetite (or outright refusal)
> >in doing anything for "all their users". However, since HTML is DOM based,
> >should an author use the longdesc attribute today, that attribute and its
> >value *are* in the DOM, and thus can be accessed by any user-agent that
> >chooses to do so.
> >
> >An incomplete list of *user-agents* that do something useful with @longdesc
> >today include:
> >
> >* JAWS Version 4.01 and up -
> >http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_products/software_jaws401newfea.asp
> >* LookOUT in combination with WebbIE. - http://www.screenreader.co.uk/
> >* Sense Reader Professional Edition v1.1.0.6 (Korean Screen Reader) -
> >http://www.haeppa.kr/?page=10
> >* SuperNova/Hal - http://www.yourdolphin.com/
> >* Thunder in combination with WebbIE. -
> >http://www.screenreader.co.uk/product.php?shopprodid=1
> >* Window-Eyes -
> >http://www.gwmicro.com/Window-Eyes/Manual/HTML/index.html?19_10longdesc.htm
> >
> >Does this meet your criteria for "widespread"? If not, why not?
> >
> >All of the afore mentioned Assistive Technology informs users that an image
> >has a long description, at which point the user has the *option* of reading
> >the description or skipping it. (Emphasis on the OPTION part, as this unique
> >feature also feeds back to the question of use-case: proposed solutions such
> >as aria-describedby currently does not allow for the toggling of 'proceed or
> >skip', and was never designed to do so)
> >
> >Since all of these tools essentially perform the same function when
> >encountering @longdesc, does this meet your criteria for "interoperable"? If
> >not, why not?
> >
> >
> >I continue to ask these questions, as I wish to ensure that I "...Make every
> >effort to ensure that this information is complete before doing so, as it
> >will have the effect of raising the bar as to what constitutes new
> >information in the event that it turns out to be incomplete."
> >
> >
> >JF
> >
> >"Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large
> >or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense.
> >Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of
> >the enemy." - Winston Churchill
> >

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
		sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net

Chair, Open Accessibility	janina@a11y.org	
Linux Foundation		http://a11y.org

Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 04:02:35 UTC