- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:31:06 -0700
- To: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Cc: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie> wrote: > Jonas Sicking wrote: >> Given the trajectory for @longdesc over the past 10 years, I think >> there's good reason to believe that implementations will support ARIA >> before @longdesc sees any significant uptake. > > I would be inclined to agree, but are we taking about vendors or > authors? I was saying that I think that implementaions will support ARIA before authors will start significantly using either @aria-describedby or @longdesc. Thus I don't think implementation support will be a limiting factor for authors. > If (as Chaals pointed out), implementation in a browser may be > relatively trivial and /if/ it is a case that it could be beneficial for > @longdesc to be dusted off and revitalized (as such) - I think this may > be worth exploring. > > For authors, re-animating use of @longdesc would tie into the paving the > cowpaths mantra - there may not have been a cow down this road for > sometime, but /if/ there is a ghost of a path I would be interested in > exploring it. I agree that if there is a cowpath we should definitely explore it, and quite likely standardize it. This is why I think that keeping @alt in the spec is the right thing to do. However I don't see a cowpath for @longdesc given how little it's been used. Looking at the "ghost path" for @longdesc seems to indicate that its syntax was a poor one given that even the people that used @longdesc, missunderstood it to the extent that they didn't even fill out a URI. / Jonas
Received on Friday, 30 October 2009 15:32:05 UTC