- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 23:09:48 +0100
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
David Singer, Thu, 15 Mar 2012 11:30:40 -0700: > On Mar 15, 2012, at 11:05 , David MacDonald wrote: >> There has been some discussion about describedby as a replacement >> for longdesc. However, screen reader user would have to encounter >> the description twice (once on the image and once on the page), >> which by definition is "long". The long text on the page clutters >> the page for most sighted users. (a deterrent for implementation by >> webmasters) > > I think you are bumping up against a tension here that we have never > really resolved. It lies between > > "you haven't really provided for accessibility unless there are > features that are explicitly and exclusively there for accessibility" > > "provisions which are invisible to the non-accessibility user and > author tend to be poorly authored; accessibility as a natural > consequence of good design for everyone is a better goal" > > I think a goal of having descriptions, transcripts, alternative text, > alternative media, available and potentially useful to everyone would > be good, myself -- I lean towards the second. If you meant that one could rather have used a visual text link, then you are right - that is almost always possible - technically speaking. But that was not what David M was discussing: He discussed what to do when it has been concluded - by the designer or whoever - that there should be no visual link. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 22:10:27 UTC