- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 14:42:50 +0200
- To: "Gez Lemon" <g.lemon@webprofession.com>, "James Craig" <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi James, (in my initial reply to your proposals I made a poorly-explained comment about using the technique under 500% zoom plus high-contrast. This is in part an attempt to provide the explanation I should have given at the time). On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 03:21:10 +0200, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > On Sep 17, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Gez Lemon <g.lemon@webprofession.com> wrote: >> On 17 September 2012 22:30, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: >>> On Sep 17, 2012, at 13:58 , Gez Lemon <g.lemon@webprofession.com> >>>> I support the change proposal, as there is no other reliable method >>>> that is supported today that does the same thing as longdesc. >>> >>> The trouble is, longdesc is neither widely supported nor reliable >>> today. If it was, I suspect that we would not be having this >>> discussion. >> >> It is better supported and more reliable than no solution at all for >> providing a long description for complex images. > > Here are six examples. Three of which work today. One which works in all > implementations, which is more than can be said of longdesc. > > http://cookiecrook.com/longdesc/ I presume the one you claim works today is http://cookiecrook.com/longdesc/iframe/ As I understand this teachnique, (and from my own testing) it only works for people who are browsing with images off, or using a screen reader. While this describes a well-known accessibility scenario, if those are indeed requirements the technique also fails in some very common accessibility scenarios. In particular, many people with visual disabilities who would benefit from long descriptions do not turn images off. And thanks to the broad support in modern systems for things like magnification and high contrast such people are likely to have a setup that meets their needs better than assuming a screenreader is somehow the answer to visual accessibility problems. I may well have misunderstood something important, or you may not yet have explained it because you thought it was obvious. But if my understanding is correct, then I think there are some serious problems with the iframe solution proposed. Because there is no "strong association" that software could rely on (as most screenreaders do for longdesc), this effectively shifts the burden of orienting the user from a handful of software developers - to all authors. There is a reason why the proposed statement of principles for designing HTML suggests that should be avoided. If your example doesn't work with images turned on, I suggest it as evidence that this approach isn't likely to be a great improvement on what we have today even given that we manage to get faster adoption among users than would be possible for longdesc. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Sunday, 23 September 2012 12:43:24 UTC