Re: ISSUE-30 longdesc - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals

Ugh, I'm really sorry to send this so late, but here is my change proposal.

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/DeprecateLongdesc

I'll likely tweak it a bit over the weekend and I'd love to get help
from anyone who's willing to. In particular I'd like to add a section
showing how to use aria-describedby to get the various behaviors that
people have been bringing up in use cases.

/ Jonas

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> I'd like to write a counter proposal. The proposal would request that
> the spec specifically points out that the ARIA spec already requires
> that aria-describedby can point to rich content, including <a>-links.
> The proposal would further make pointing aria attributes (including
> aria-describedby) to elements that are "hidden" using the @hidden
> attribute legal.
>
> I should have time to write such a proposal before June 25th.
>
> / Jonas
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> 'Should HTML 5 include a longdesc attribute for images'
>>
>> The current status for this issue:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/30
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-30
>>
>> This issue was reopened on March 2nd 2011:
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0037.html
>>
>> We have a single Change Proposal to include longdesc in HTML5:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/InstateLongdesc
>>
>> At this time the Chairs would also like to solicit alternate Change
>> Proposals (possibly with "zero edits" as the Proposal Details), in case
>> anyone would like to advocate the status quo or a different change than the
>> specific one in the existing Change Proposal.
>>
>> The following Change Proposal can be resubmitted, but we strongly urge it to
>> be updated to reflect the new information provided before doing so:
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0393.html
>>
>> If no counter-proposals or alternate proposals are received by June 25th,
>> 2011, we will proceed to evaluate the Change Proposal that we have received
>> to date.
>>
>> - Sam Ruby
>>
>>
>

Received on Saturday, 25 June 2011 07:22:17 UTC