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

longdesc (was Re: use of aria-hidden to provide a text description not visible on the page.)

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:56:29 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTimTfNkSUv1TXTzNFmcXO-q7x+KXXRb=ssZHpZj7@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
David Bolter  wrote:
>   Sorry a bit rushed here and I don't feel like I fully understand this
> thread.

This technique along with many other that have surfaced recently seem
to be a reaction to longdesc being dropped from HTML5.

No one has come up with anything simpler or better than longdesc.
Banishing an existing solution while not providing a better solution,
it not a solution. All solutions presented to date seem to me to be
convoluted hacks. The existing solution should have been improved (we
had bugs on how to do that [1] [2] [3] [4]), or the existing solution
should be gracefully replaced with a better solution.

The Chairs' Decision [5] states that:


This issue can be reopened if new information comes 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 have been researching and amassing use cases of Longdesc in the Wild.

Is this information grounds to reopen the issue or the basis for a
formal objection?

Best Regards,

[1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10019
[2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10017
[3] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10018
[4] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10015
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/att-0112/issue-30-decision.html

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 20:57:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:44 UTC