- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 23:03:16 -0400
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- CC: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, 'David Singer' <singer@apple.com>, 'Charles McCathie Nevile' <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, public-html-a11y@w3.org
On 09/22/2012 10:44 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Sam Ruby, Sat, 22 Sep 2012 21:47:38 -0400: >> On 09/22/2012 09:13 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >>> Sam Ruby, Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:21:09 -0400: >>>> On 09/22/2012 05:36 PM, John Foliot wrote: >>>>> David Singer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> But. >>>>>> >>>>>> a) why would anyone now implement longdesc knowing that the >>>>>> descriptions that they'd expose to users were, for the vast majority, >>>>>> 'hopelesslt bad'? >>>>> >>>>> 1) There is no other functional replacement in effect today. >>>> >>>> The keyword being 'today'. >>>> >>>> I'll point out that there is a false dichotomy in play here. >>>> >>>> Today there is only one mainstream browser that natively implements >>>> longdesc. >>> >>> What do you mean by saying that only one 'natively implements'? >> >> http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/research/ld-rendering2.html > > OK. > >>> For mainstream browsers, the situation is: >>> >>> 1. Firefox has support in its A11Y API >>> 2. Opera has contextual menu support. >>> 3. Internet Explorer has A11Y API support (but >>> I have heard that it is buggy). >> >> Any possibility that the proposal can be updated to NOT define the >> user agents in 1 and 3 above as not meeting expectations? > > That sounds like a good description of today: today offering a A11Y API > implementations is one way @longdesc is implemented. Those who > implement it that way, should 'get credit' for that. I would encourage a 'today' specification to avoid DIScrediting those that do not: http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#option - Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 23 September 2012 03:03:45 UTC