Re: handling fallback content for still images

On Jul 5, 2007, at 10:17 AM, James Graham wrote:

> Robert Burns wrote:
>>> a) That there is a real use case that demands rich fallback for  
>>> images. Possibly anyone with this use case today would be using  
>>> longdesc to provide the rich content so demonstrating the correct  
>>> use of longdesc with rich contents would be helpful.  
>>> Alternatively a series of examples in which the user experience  
>>> is significantly degraded where rich fallback is not available  
>>> are likely to be persuasive.
>> Why would correct use of the longdesc help my case.
> Because it would demonstrate that, despite the complexity, authors  
> had sufficient need for rich fallback that using longdesc to  
> provide it was worthwhile.
> If you can't demonstrate that authors are using the existing  
> mechanisms that are in place, you have the somewhat harder task of  
> demonstrating that they would use rich fallback if only it were  
> epsilon easier

No, I don't.

Received on Thursday, 5 July 2007 15:19:48 UTC