- From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:26:14 +1100
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, singer@apple.com, janina@rednote.net, rubys@intertwingly.net, laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com, mjs@apple.com, paul.cotton@microsoft.com, public-html-a11y@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Silvia Pfeiffer, Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:11:37 +1100: >> Use cases are appreciated, but they don't always require another new >> element or attribute. >> The image IS a label for the video, so @aria-label is just another >> representation of the same thing. How complicated does it have to be? >> Silvia. > > If there - for the video element - is such a congruency between the > aria-label and the video poster, then doesn't that imply that the > @aria-label should describe, not the video, but the poster image? It's a transitive relationship: the @aria-label describes the poster which describes the video, therefore @aria-label describes the video. Also, I don't think we need to discuss this any more. It's already escalated to formal objection from issue 142. http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/142 Cheers, Silvia. Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 01:27:02 UTC