- From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 13:52:01 -0700
- To: "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
At 13:45 -0700 9/06/09, T.V Raman wrote: >David, by the measure you define in your first sentence, HTML >qualifies well -- well, OK, I should have said "completely incorrect, i.e. not containing anything useful" (like summary="pid435167"). Most HTML pages contain something useful (or the web would be so heavily polluted by useless pages, we'd never expect to find a usable one, and we'd stop using browsers). >David Singer writes: > > My guess is that we would say that something has *failed* when its > > use on the web has become hopelessly polluted with incorrect usage, > > such that those needing what it's intended for no longer look there > > for their answer. I think that was the situation described for > > longdesc. > > > > so, abuse is widespread and swamps usage -> failure. we cannot soon > > recover. think again. > > > > Something that is neither used nor misused is neither a success or > > failure, in my opinion. > > > > neither abusage nor usage -> not succeeding. think about why we're > > not getting traction. > > > > plenty of usage and not too much abuse -> success! go and celebrate! > > (sigh, doesn't seem to happen often in accessibility) > > -- > > David Singer > > Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc. > >-- >Best Regards, >--raman > >Title: Research Scientist >Email: raman@google.com >WWW: http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/ >Google: tv+raman >GTalk: raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com >PGP: http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc -- David Singer Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 20:53:17 UTC