- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:28:43 +0000
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Leif Halvard Silli writes: > > I subsequently proposed that we write a separate specification for > @aria-describedAT/@longdesc. So rather than drop it, I suggest to run > with it. > > Could we do that? We would have to make a change proposal which > includes - or eventually promises [I'm not sure what the chairs woudl > want] - a specification of '@aria-describedAT/@longdesc'. > > I see 2-3 options of such a mini-spec - but there could be more: > > * Either the spec describes aria-describedAT - and obsoletes @longdesc > > * Or the spec describes aria-describedAT - and says that @longdesc can > be used, whenever aria-describedAT is used as well. > > * Or we write a spec which defines @longdesc as an ARIA attribute - to > be used as you have envisioned @aria-descrbedAT. [Thus, we would drop > aria-descrbedat and only have @longdesc.] > -- ARIA will do DescribedAT. When we do we will consider ramifications across multiple markup environments, as we have always done, e.g. in a separate response to Silvia Pfeiffer I noted that we're considering use cases and requirements from Epub. Another example, we're interested in ARIA over SVG. So, writing an ARIA-DescribedAT should be considered an option to submit to PF. That's certainly acceptable. However, this wouldn't produce a solution today, or even next month, and a11y has been waiting a long time. My druthers would be to accept longdesc right away and call it obsolete but conforming. That clearly signals that a replacement is expected while providing needed functionality right away--the same it has been available since html 4. As I said, this is my preference. Others may have other views. Lastly, I would agree that HTML could also craft a mechanism to serve the need in a superior fashion. There's nothing wrong in doing that, but that would take some time, certainly. Too bad so much time has been wasted trying to make describedby fit where it just wasn't going to fit. And, every day that passes with longdesc shoved aside is another day when this core requirement is unmet in the spec. As previously noted, it hasn't been met for half a decade. That's a long time especially for a "living" specification that supposedly so responsive to needs. I know you're trying to find a solution, Leif. I'm doing my best to be as helpful as I can. Janina > Leif Halvard Silli -- Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org Linux Foundation http://a11y.org Chair, Protocols & Formats Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2012 22:29:07 UTC