- From: Monika Trebo <mtrebo@stanford.edu>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 13:30:29 -0700
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Cc: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi everyone, I think the fact that something potentially useful (in the case of the longdesc for people with special needs) is not widely used or not used properly, should not be a reason to abandon it. Validation is not used widely either, -to my knowledge about 95% of html out there is invalid, and none of us would consider dropping it. The longdesc may not be used because people don't know about it and it's proper use. Why don't we come up with a brief explanation eg. as part of the "Tips for Webmasters". An HTML editor which is widely used at Stanford prompts users to enter alt and longdesc when inserting images etc. It is an accessibility issue. Regards, Monika Monika Trebo Stanford Genome Technology Center 855 California Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94304 Phone: (650) 812-2001 Fax: (650) 812-1975 mtrebo@stanford.edu On Jun 22, 2007, at 5:06 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Laura Carlson wrote: >> Anyway, what rationale for dropping longdesc? > > IIRC, the reason for not including it was because very few authors > ever use it and, when it is used, it's not used properly. More > research on the issue is welcome. In particular, evidence of > significant real world usage that provides a practical benefit to > users would be good. > > -- > Lachlan Hunt > http://lachy.id.au/ >
Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 20:59:39 UTC