- From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:49:29 -0400
- To: "'Philip TAYLOR \(Ret'd\)'" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>, "'David Poehlman'" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Cc: "'Leif Halvard Silli'" <lhs@malform.no>, "'Henri Sivonen'" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "'Matt Morgan-May'" <mattmay@adobe.com>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'W3C WAI-XTECH'" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Not necessarily. The <object> fallback content is often used as "You need to get the plugin" type of content, which is not a replacement for the content itself. J.Ja > -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 2:08 PM > To: David Poehlman > Cc: Leif Halvard Silli; Henri Sivonen; Matt Morgan-May; HTML WG; W3C > WAI-XTECH > Subject: Re: Is longdesc a good solution? (was: Acessibility of <audio> > and <video>) > > > Isn't "long replacement" exactly what > fallback content is in <object> ? > > ** Phil. > -------- > David Poehlman wrote: > > I was trying to say that @longdesc should contain an indepth > description and > > not be used as replacement. We don't have anything for long > replacement > > that I know of.
Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2008 18:50:28 UTC