W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2010

Re: summarization information delivery options: attribute or element

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 10:56:10 +0000
Message-ID: <4B87A8CA.1020308@cfit.ie>
To: Gez Lemon <g.lemon@webprofession.com>
CC: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
Hi Gez,

> On 26 February 2010 10:33, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie> wrote:
>> Finally, as I know that we (sic) have all done a lot of advocacy work to
>> argue for the retention of @summary, to be clear, I think @summary is
>> great for the audience that it was designed to serve (blind users), and
>> I would hope for the sake of backwards compatibility within HTML5 that
>> its use would still be considered valid /but/ we do need a richer more
>> capable element to future proof this functionality and potentially
>> extend this usefulness to other user groups.
> My issue with this is that by addressing the needs of all user groups,
> the group that summary was originally intended for will be left out. I
> can't imagine many authors writing a long description that contains
> things that visually obvious. I don't see the purpose of introducing a
> new element to do something that can already be done.

Yes, maybe things that are impossible are just that. We should forget
about engineering a HTML Utopia and be thankful that so much of the web
manages to work at all.

I think I am done with this discussion in truth, as SteveF said via
twitter yesterday none of us are the final decision makers. If I had my
way @summary would just have been left as is from the start - without
the rest of the noise.


Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 10:56:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:09 UTC