Re: Call for consensus on longdesc change proposal

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Denis Boudreau
<> wrote:
> Hello,
> On 2011-05-17, at 4:57 PM, Laura Carlson wrote:
>> As for the last question, in addition to what Cliff said, I experience
>> that myself with developers. It is sad but true.
> Same experience here. <del>Developers</del><ins>people</ins> are lazy.
> Sad and frustrating, but the truth, nonetheless.

What makes you think that would be better with the @longdesc
attribute? I am concerned that if the argument is "we need longdesc
because aria attributes are not in use" the logical next reaction is -
let's remove aria attributes then.

I'm a developer and I really don't care what the attribute is called
as long as it is clear what its purpose is. But I don't see a logical
conclusion from "aria attributes have failed" to "let's introduce some
other attributes that nobody is using yet to take their place".

I agree with Cynthia that that is a very weak argument and likely will
just result in a very bad discussion for a11y. Laziness is an argument
against a11y, not an argument for @longdesc.


Received on Tuesday, 17 May 2011 22:59:59 UTC