W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Consensus on longdesc change proposal

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 14:08:44 +0200
To: "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Cc: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "Judy Brewer" <jbrewer@w3.org>, "Janina Sajka" <janina@rednote.net>, "Cynthia Shelly" <cyns@microsoft.com>, "Gez Lemon" <g.lemon@webprofession.com>
Message-ID: <op.vwamouhlwxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Mon, 30 May 2011 14:03:31 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer  
<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Charles McCathieNevile
> <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:50:15 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer
>>> The longdesc change proposal says in the section on "Suggested
>>> Alternatives Are Not Viable Solutions" about aria-describedby:
>>> "aria-describedby kills off links: ARIA 1.0 specifies that anything
>>> that aria-describedby points to is presented to the user as if it
>>> occurred inside an attribute. Hence, if aria-describedby points to an
>>> element which is - or contains - a link, the link will be completely
>>> dead - the AT won't even inform the user about the link presence. "
>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/InstateLongdesc/AlternativesAreNotViableSolutions#aria-describedby
>>> I believe from recent discussions that ARIA specifies no such thing,
>> It is ambiguous, but the definition refers to the definition of
>> aria-labeledBy which refers to
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-label
>> which states that the value is a string (i.e. not markup)
> Don't get me wrong. I am not stating that @longdesc is not necessary
> because of @aria-describedby. @longdesc clearly has the advantage of
> pointing to off-page content, which @aria-describedby clearly does
> not. I am just wondering if for on-page content @aria-describedby
> could be made a lot more useful if it did interpret markup and that
> that from what Janina said at the last media subgroup meeting it may
> indeed be something WAI is already considering, seeing as the
> definition is not quite clear.

I think the definition is logically clear, but the document isn't very  
easy to follow (i.e. it requires actual work, something that we can bet  
will reduce the amount of it that is correctly implemented).

And yes, I think it would be an improvement to handle markup. There is a  
separate discussion related to ARIA which is that people want to implement  
it *purely* for accessibility APIs, which seems like a bad idea. But  
somewhat tangential to your point.


Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Monday, 30 May 2011 12:09:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:56 UTC