Re: Process objections to FPWD

Another potential compromise solution for consensus would be to spec
longdesc as "obsolete but conforming", i.e. effectively "deprecated".
This option has previously received some support in the TF and HTMLWG:

In the HTML-A11Y-TF's original poll:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Apr/0180.html

Richard and Judy:
http://www.w3.org/2011/04/18-text-minutes.html

Janina:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2012Mar/0014.html

Steve:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2012Mar/0031.html

Cynthia
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Sep/0289.html

James:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Nov/0151.html

Me:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jun/0254.html

Since the HTML5 spec already requires UAs to expose longdesc [1] this
option would just result in validators issuing a warning instead of an
error. I think this approach would provide better advice to authors
and is more likely to gain consensus in the HTMLWG.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/single-page.html#dom-img-longdesc

-Matt

Received on Thursday, 6 December 2012 18:39:09 UTC