- From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:37:41 -0500
- To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
On Jul 14, 2007, at 11:30 PM, Robert Burns wrote: > If these same principles should not be applied to <object> then I > could understand that. However, the only reason I can think of (and > I'm asking for help here in understanding the objections) is that > @longdesc is simply more difficult for authors and users to use > (compared to <object> contents). Is it that @longdes either > requires a separate round-trip to the server or instead, deployment > of CSS or DOM calls to deal with concealing the local document > fragment until that fallback is requested by the user agent or the > user directly. Is that what everyone feels about this. Then just > say so. Then I'll know you're understanding what I'm talking about, > and we can stop beating the dead horse as Jon put it. I should add one caveat. If the sentiment expressed above is the sentiment agreed to by everyone, it suggests to me that we should not be deprecating @longdesc on element (not that we are, but the current draft omits it). If anything, we could stand to lose @alt on <img> before we could use the more flexible and richer @longdesc attribute. I'm not saying we should get rid of either one, but we should definitely not get rid of @longdesc. If @alt is therefore redundant (as others suggest it is on <object>), we could consider deprecating that. Take care, Rob
Received on Sunday, 15 July 2007 04:37:49 UTC