Re: Call for Consensus (CfC): Transition the Image Description specification to Proposed Recommendation (PR) status

On 5 September 2014 03:42, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:

> PROPOSITION #1: The HTML-A11Y Task Force believes that the archived
> record of deliberation on the topics raised in the Formal Objection
> filed by Apple Computer on this specification is sufficient to support
> progressing it toward Recommendation status.  We request that W3C
> management move forward toward an expedited resolution of that
> objection. The Formal Objection can be found at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Aug/0028.html

I object to this proposition. This TF has not addressed the issues
raised in the Formal Objection by Apple, or previous objections on
these issues. For example, the exceptionally poor quality of existing
longdesc usage on the web has been repeatedly raised and has not been
addressed, instead it has just been dismissed like all the other
negative feedback. Having not been addressed in the past, these issues
are now routinely dismissed as "not new information". It's just not
good enough.

> PROPOSITION #2: The Task Force thanks Igalia for its implementation
> report and its comments on the CR specification and supports the
> disposition of those comments as proposed at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Sep/0000.html
> with the additional modification (also accepted by Igalia) at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2014Sep/0011.html.

I object to this proposition. It's unacceptable for the TF
co-ordinators to again just blow off feedback without properly
addressing it.

For example, in the absence of any major browser supporting the
requirement "User agents must make the link available to all users
through the regular user interface", due to the exceptionally poor
quality of existing longdesc usage, advising authors they "MUST NOT
rely solely on longdesc" should be included.

Without it, we will be perpetuating a decade-long WAI accessibility
car-crash where authors who follow W3C advice inadvertently exclude
the vast majority of users who would otherwise benefit from access to
descriptions, if well-known and widely-practised alternative
techniques had been used instead.

> PROPOSITION 3: The HTML-A11Y Task Force recommends and requests that the
> HTML and PF Working Groups transition the HTML 5 Image Description
> Extension specification to Proposed Recommendation (PR status using the
> draft document at:
> http://www.w3.org/2014/09/04-PR-html-longdesc/

I object to this proposition. The consensus is still that longdesc is
already effectively obsolete:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Dec/0030.html

http://www.w3.org/2013/10/31-html-a11y-minutes.html#item04

Authors and implementers should be advised longdesc is already
effectively obsolete, and WAI will be _officially_ obsoleting it in
future, to avoid wasting any more time on a technique that is
ineffective now and will in all probability continue to be just as
ineffective in the future:

"It is clear to me that as an important browser (webkit) and assistive
technology (voiceover) will not implement longdesc, it is not a viable
solution for the general provision of longer text alternatives for
images on the web."

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Aug/0038.html

-Matt

Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2014 12:44:55 UTC