- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 05:18:58 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10642 --- Comment #47 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2010-10-05 05:18:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #43) > If such a mechanism were to be added, it would be better to use an element > instead of an attribute, so that the text equivalent can use semantic markup > and is not limited to plain text. @Maciej, where would you place the element you have in mind? Inside or outside <video/>? Note that Everett's proposal *is* to use an element: <poster src=" URI " alt="Alternative description of poster image." /> An advantage to this solution: if the image is unavailable, then the @alt text could serve as fallback. While it would be nice to allow semantic markup (and if you have a good solution, then I am all for it), it is allready accepted to use @alt for image alternative text. @John: I think there could be a technical advantage to reusing @alt. @Ian: Clearly, <video alt="Foo."> could be contrieved, but <poster alt="Foo."/> shouldn't be. W.r.t. inside/outside <videeo>: in bug 10938, I propose an "accessibility stocking" - an inline element (intitially suggested to be called <textual>) that can be wrapped around embedding elements: Any textual content inside <textual> will serve as short alternative text for the video. A <poster/> element could also be placed inside <textual> as well: <textual> <poster src=photo.jpg alt="Photo of Putin having caught a Siberian tiger"> Video footage shot to demo how Russia protects their endagered tigers. <video src="vid"></video> </textual> (<textual> could also be placed inside <video>, I guess. However, <video> is designed to not reveal its content unless the codec isn't working or the the video resource is unavalailable. Btw, <textual> is also intended to solve the link-to-transcript problem and link-to-long-description problem.) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 5 October 2010 05:19:00 UTC