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

Re: ISSUE-122 shalott-example: Call for revisions

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 15:23:49 -0600
Message-ID: <AANLkTik93nzfwYLv9YW9EaiDspEWZEc_O7EXD-dM88bY@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Maciej,

> First, let me note that this set of questions is in no way official or
> endorsed by the chairs.

True. I raised issue 31. Steve, Josh, and I worked on it from before
there was a tracker. It is a big issue.  Its scope covers alt in the
<img> design space. I wrote that Wiki page to help people understand
the three parts of the issue.

> The text of ISSUE-31 itself is about
> machine-checkable authoring conformance criteria:
> <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31>. It does not say anything
> about examples.

Ian's (proposal 1) and Steve's (proposal 8) and mine (proposal 9) all
address the question, "Where/who will define requirements on the
possible values of alt attribute."

> However, since the chairs have not yet made an official ruling on whether
> this question is in scope...


> Does your ISSUE-122 Change Proposal take a distinct position on this
> question from any of the existing proposals? From the chart you link, it
> seems to match Proposal 9.  I think adding more redundant proposals to
> ISSUE-31 is not helpful at this stage.

It is  Proposal 9.

> The original definition of the issue only appears to cover the first of these questions, not 2 and 3:

Note: Action 54: Third Draft bound to issue 31, August 2008

"The accessibility requirements on the possible values of the alt
attributes are defined by WCAG 2.0 and not HTML 5. "

Best Regards,
Laura L. Carlson

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Monday, 7 February 2011 21:24:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:09 UTC