- From: Matthew Turvey <mcturvey@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 13:44:24 +0100
- To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
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