- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:32:47 +1100
- To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- Cc: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTMLAccessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:26 PM, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote: > Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: >> >> > As Chaals pointed out almost 3 years ago, we can go through the whole >> > process to emerge at the end with something that is essentially what >> > @longdesc is today, but with a shiny new name. >> >> If after such an exercise we end up exactly at the same spot where >> @longdesc is now, then indeed there is no purpose in giving it a new >> name. However, it is an assumption that may not hold true. Instead, >> all it achieves is that we keep spinning in circles. Is it really that >> important to hold on to the name? > > 2 words: backwards compatibility, so yes, keeping the name is important. Since a lot of the content in existance for @longdesc is non-conformant anyway, I don't understand that argument. >> Let's just get started on redefining >> what we want, from scratch, without any prejudice as to where we will >> end, and see where the journey takes us. If we end up in the same >> place and it's all achievable with @longdesc, then we can still put >> that label back on the effort. > > I support the effort to examine user requirements, as well as HTML5's > requirements to provide appropriate technology to support both users and > other business & legal requirements. I would welcome the opportunity to > examine @longdesc to see if we can improve and expand its usefulness, but I > think that tossing out the existing attribute without a viable replacement > today does significant harm and benefits no-one. The development that I'm suggesting does not necessarily imply tossing out @longdesc, so I don't understand that argument either. > So rather than casting it as a blank slate, let's cast it as a period of > refinement. I think in that light you would find wider support moving > forward. Learning from existing @longdesc experience is certainly good. Silvia.
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 04:33:35 UTC