- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:06:56 -0600
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Hi Sam and all, >> This might be the elephant in the room that everyone is dancing around. > > Without debating the merit of that point, I will state that that's an > entirely different point. Yes it certainly is. > Unless you also make the case that having > information relevant to authors that make use of elements such as <img> > and attributes such as alt="" in the same place as the definition of > those elements is counter productive, Do you mean a case that includes rationale such as: * When information in a W3C HTML5 document that is relevant to authors conflicts with W3C WCAG, it is counter productive to those authors. * That having a contextual link within the body of the HTML5 spec that leads to accurate information and will be maintained by the group that is widely regarded as the international standard group for Web accessibility is more valuable than having inaccurate, conflicting information in the HTML5 spec that may or may not be maintained by who knows who. Would this type of information suffice to reopen the issue or maybe it would be better to simply include it with Janina's and Steve's Formal Objections? http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/formal-objection-status.html#LC-5 http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/formal-objection-status.html#ISSUE-031b By the way, two of the bugs cited in Steve's Change Proposal are mine. CAPTCHA http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9216 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9169 Webcam http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9215 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9174 I haven't and won't have the time to pursue having them be corrected in the HTML5 spec through its lengthy Change Proposal process (i.e. we have been working on longdesc since 2007 and that issue is still unresolved.). So I expect that the conflicts between Steve's spec and Ian's spec will remain. The HTML Working Group should not be setting normative advice for alt values. That is WCAG's domain, especially when that advice is in opposition to WCAG's advice. Providing the mechanism(s) for a text alternative is an inalienable HTML WG concern. Whereas providing guidance on values for alternative text is an inalienable WAI concern. Best Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 19:07:29 UTC