Re: dropping longdesc attribute

On Sat, 23 Jun 2007, Steven Faulkner wrote:
> Why is it that you have access to data ((Source: Unpublished Google 
> internal survey of several billion pages conducted in September 2006.) 
> from an unpublished survey that you can quote seletively to back up your 
> arguments against the inclusion of accessibility related attributes, but 
> other members of the group who are trying to argue for their continued 
> inclusion cannot draw on and interpret the same data for the benefit of 
> thier arguments?

He asked me for the data on IRC. Feel free to catch me (Hixie) on IRC when 
I'm at work and if I have the data I can provide it.

> Why not provide access to the data to all members of the working group 
> rather than pulling out selective results to benefit a particular 
> argument?

For commercial reasons, I can't publish the raw data. Some of the 
sanitised data from earlier studies is at:

...but it's long overdue for an update. I'll see what I can do. It would 
be cool if other members of the group with similar resources could publish 
similar studies; relying on just one set of proprietary numbers that have 
been sanitised for public consumption is certainly better than nothing but 
it's a far cry from ideal.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 09:02:16 UTC