- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:35:46 -0500
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Barry McMullin <barry.mcmullin@dcu.ie>
Hi David, > There is nothing wrong with a page that says "A detailed description > of this can be found _here_.", and indeed this will, in fact, benefit > a number of users other than those using screen readers (users new to > the subject, in some cases, for example). Adding longdesc text in page or a link to a page would add visual clutter for the sighted. As an author, visual designer, and artist that is an important consideration to me. For sighted users, the consequences of adding a redundant visual text description is information overload which wastes time and taxes attention at the content's peril. Removing such visual clutter increases understanding and saves time (actual time-on-task). This is where visual design plays an increasingly important role for sighted users. A chart or graph can communicate concepts, condense a larger body of information and convey that information quickly. It is what visual design and data visualization is about. Adding redundant visual links or longdesc text in page would be counterproductive and slow sighted users down. A longdesc's aim is to be a substitute for such the data visualizations to the blind. It solves a problem. However, user agents should (as Opera currently does) natively possess the option to reveal the presence of longdesc to all users. This provides a practical method for developers who want a tool to check longdesc and keep it up to date. It also gives everyone access to longdesc content if they actually are curious. Bugs had been filed to improve longdesc. For instance, "Native user agent support for exposing longdesc to all users". http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10019 All of the longdesc bugs now been marked WONTFIX or INVALID. Obsoleting longdesc and telling authors and designers to use visible text links or the full text description in page isn't the answer here. So I'll continue using HTML 4 whenever I need longdesc and I'll continue teaching web design students HTML4 whenever longdesc is needed, because HTML5 currently doesn't provide that functionality in a valid/conforming feature. Best Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson On 8/23/10, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: > OK, I hesitate to ask, point this out. It is perhaps a minor point. > > There is an assumption/assertion here that a long description is hugely > relevant but only through accessibility provisions. But there may easily be > puzzled users who do not have vision issues. There is nothing wrong with a > page that says "A detailed description of this can be found _here_.", and > indeed this will, in fact, benefit a number of users other than those using > screen readers (users new to the subject, in some cases, for example). Not > using the attribute does not preclude you from building informatively > constructed web sites, does it? I don't find "A detailed description of this > can be found _here_." 'traumatic' or 'confusing', myself, in general. > > On Aug 23, 2010, at 14:02 , Joshue O Connor wrote: > >> To explain - I will quote Barry directly from the CFIT website. >> >> "Double-negative" because longdesc is not being used here — but I would >> have liked to use it, and its use would have been absolutely >> appropriate! It's just that weak user-agent support meant that using it >> would potentially have left the long description actually unavailable to >> people who might benefit from it. So instead, I decided to compromise >> (somewhat) the experience of people who already could perceive the >> graphical image perfectly well, and exposed the long description for all >> users (even though it is redundant for the majority). This decision >> then, logically, had the further effect of requiring an explanation — >> for those majority users — of what a long description is and why — which >> explanation, in turn, is redundant for those users who would normally >> actually benefit from a long description! >> >> I humbly suggest that such a convoluted (nay, "traumatic"!) design >> decision — genuinely existing "in the wild" — should count as legitimate >> evidence of the use-case-need for longdesc!?" [3] >> > > David Singer > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc. > > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Monday, 23 August 2010 13:36:25 UTC