Re: Consolidated issues that may qualify as "controversial"

It is good that ARIA isn't controversial and may replace @longdesc.

But it seems logical to treat @longdesc exactly the same way as 
@summary. Thus if @summary isn't closed, @longdesc shouldn't be 
closed either.

For instance, @summary and @longdesc should have the same level of
deprecation/non-deprecation/obsolete-ness. There is no logical
reason to have it otherwise.

As Murray said [1]:

> 2) I don't see how you reach this conclusion. @summary will
> complete its useful life after ARIA is fully supported,
> deployed and employed. There is no need to push it onto an ice
> flow just yet. We can afford to wait until its replacement is
> actually in place.

Hence I suggest not closing ISSUE-30 at this moment.



Maciej Stachowiak On 09-08-12 09.33:

> Based on what Henri says, I instead suggest closing ISSUE-30,
> unless someone objects.
> - Maciej
> On Aug 12, 2009, at 12:29 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 2009, at 10:11, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> ISSUE-30: longdesc - Should HTML 5 include a longdesc
>>> attribute for images
>> I think this is no longer controversial, since integrating
>> ARIA into HTML5 isn't controversial on the general level and
>> the WAI-CG's expressed consensus is:
>>> Because we are confident that aria-describedby will be
>>> supported by assistive technologies at least as well as
>>> longdesc when HTML5 becomes a W3C Recommendation:
>>> * IF o aria-describedby is incorporated in HTML5 o and
>>> aria-describedby allows pointing to long text alternatives
>>> that are off of the page (by pointing to a link on the
>>> page) * THEN o we believe it is acceptable to obsolete 
>>> longdesc in HTML5.
>> -- Henri Sivonen

Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 11:33:06 UTC