- From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 13:11:43 -0400
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: public-html-a11y@w3.org
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 07:48:22 -0400 Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > > Normally the way things like these are handled is that the status > section is updated with a warning and a link to the relevant bugs, and > the heartbeat is published. > > Two such bugs are linked in the previous heartbeat: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-html-alt-techniques-20121025/ > > Is there any reason why such couldn't be done in this case? Minuimum for me would be to link to https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26868 at the two examples (caption and complex image description) that should at least mention longdesc. Since we had consensus on publishing longdesc I don't see how we could have consensus on a document that could be taken as implying (although it doesn't say) that one shouldn't use longdesc. The TF hadn't reviewed the document, I think, in light of longdesc moving forward. There are some other technical issues with it, but those don't (in my view) need to be resolved before a heartbeat can be published, and there are bugs on the ones I know about. It would be helpful to wait until the Director's Decision was published on longdesc before putting this document out, even as a heartbeat, but that seems to be taking much longer than expected, and is a political rather than a technical request. Hope this is clearer. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 17:11:46 UTC