- From: John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:08:15 -0700
- To: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'Michael\(tm\) Smith'" <mike@w3.org>, <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "'public html for all'" <list@html4all.org>, "'Al Gilman'" <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > > If I haven't replied to an e-mail sent prior to this e-mail: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Apr/0220.html > > Please let me know. I thought I had dealt with all feedback prior to > that point. > I believe that Charles McCathieNevile reopened ISSUE-31 "Should img without alt ever be conforming" late last week, in part due to procedural/administrative issues. (Action item #54 still being open) [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Apr/0231.html] > > > Regarding: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0082.html > > ...I did carefully read this message the spec has changed to take into > account that feedback. However, that e-mail was rather vague and it > wasn't at all clear to me exactly what was desired. Non-vague conclusion follows: "Conclusion: barring the introduction of new, good reasons for a change, the failure of the HTML5 draft to make @alt on <img> an across-the-board requirement (even if sometimes it has the value of "") is a bug." I guess we are awaiting *NEW*, *GOOD* reasons for change beyond skepticism and opinion. If this qualitative information has emerged, please be kind enough to point us to it. Furthermore, the response also stated: "The language "In such cases, the alt attribute may be omitted," gives the appearance of creating a policy line that is inconsistent with WCAG, whether 1.0 or 2.0. As such, this needs to be changed." Yet the current draft reads: "This could be the case, for instance, on a photo upload site, if the site has received 8000 photos from a user without the user annotating any of them. In such cases, the alt attribute may be omitted, but the alt attribute should be included, with a useful value, if at all possible." [http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#alt] (I do not see the recommended change implemented, although note the change from 3,000 to 8,000 photos) > > If there is some more concrete feedback that I should deal with, I > would encourage you to send it. I believe that Laura Carlson, Steven Faulkner, et.al., as members of the HTML WG, have requested further feedback from 2 other W3C working groups. [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Apr/0408.html] JF
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 21:09:05 UTC