- From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 07:58:30 -0500
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: Geoff Freed <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Message-ID: <OF57FB7AD1.F9104C8D-ON86257A83.0046AD95-86257A83.0047528E@us.ibm.com>
Rich Schwerdtfeger James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote on 09/23/2012 04:24:17 PM: > From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> > To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, > Cc: Geoff Freed <geoff_freed@wgbh.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org > Date: 09/23/2012 04:25 PM > Subject: Re: 48-Hour Consensus Call: InstateLongdesc CP Update > > On Sep 23, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > > > On 09/23/2012 04:16 PM, Geoff Freed wrote: > >> > >> Just for the record, I think that @longdesc *should* be improved. If > >> the name remains the same, fine. If it changes or is moved to ARIA, > >> fine. I just don't want it to go away before that new Thing is > >> available. > > > > I must say that that's an eminently reasonable position to take. > > > > Geoff: I gather that James hasn't convinced you that iframe is a > superior solution to address the challenges you face. > > > > James: and I gather that Geoff hasn't convinced you to advocate > within Apple to natively implement support for longdesc. > > I agree that Geoff's position is reasonable. I am also not opposed > to advocating for ways of implementing longer descriptive > alternatives, whether or not it uses @longdesc. Geoff's language is > in line with requests I have heard from publishers; that they want > the ability to make their content accessible, regardless of the > technical implementation specific. That is clearly a goal we all > share, as is the main reason we've devoted more effort to allowing > content (such as SVG, MathML, Canvas, etc.) to be made accessible > across the board, rather than focusing effort on a technique that > ultimately we expect to be obsolete. > > I acknowledge the need for extending a transitional period while the > rest of these technologies become more widely supported. > > > And while I identified both of you as individuals, I note that > neither of you are alone in your positions on this matter. > > > > Again I ask: is there any chance that we can get a consensus spec out of > > this: one that doesn't attempt to portray publishing software that > > produces markup including longdesc as non-conforming; nor does it > > attempt to portray user agent software that doesn't natively implement > > longdesc as non-conforming? > > That sounds like a good compromise. > I also support this compromise. This gives us the opportunity to focus our efforts on producing a better, working, solution that can work across technologies, while not breaking what is there. > > Geoff: if such an extension specification were written, could you live > > with that for now? > > > > James: same question. > > Yes. > I could also live with this for now. Again, I prefer we get to work on a better alternative in ARIA with the browser vendors. I am confident that we can do that. > Thanks, > James > >
Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 12:59:17 UTC