W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Working Group Decision on 142 poster-alt

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 11:49:34 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=OP6fbwwbWxA=bdf-hPwyvg8+A6-MxKL4pVwG3@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> At this point we only have objections to the "No Poster Alt" Change
> Proposal, so we turn to examine objections to the "Introduce a new
> <firstframe> element" to see if we find a stronger one.  Each of the
> following are quotes from the survey:
>  Given that sighted users won't know (or, if they do, care) that
>  they're looking at the poster image, it would be confusing and
>  inconsistent to have a short text alternative specifically for the
>  poster image for non-sighted users.
> This is an opinion.  Given that there was a concrete counter-example
> presented, this opinion was not given much weight.
> . . .

This is a minor point, but in the future, could the chairs please
indent quotes by more than one space?  It's hard to tell apart the
quotes from what the chairs are saying, especially multi-paragraph
quotes.  Four spaces' indentation should be safe, but two should be a
bare minimum.
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 15:50:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:35 UTC