- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:00:15 +0100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Jonas Sicking wrote: > if you think this was a bad idea, it'll be much > more productive to try to gather support for the extension than to try > to argue in the bug. Extensions is a primary way for us to gather data > on how popular a particular feature is. We always look towards popular > extensions for ideas for features to integrate into Firefox. Don't really care about the longdesc attribute either way, but ages ago I did a little proof-of-concept longdesc extension https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/273 which some people seem to like. P -- Patrick H. Lauke ______________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ ______________________________________________________________ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ______________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 18:01:08 UTC