- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:45:33 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Steve Faulkner, Sun, 20 Mar 2011 13:05:00 -0700: > I have written up example text adding it to the current spec text for > image. The additional text is identified using the <ins> element and > is futher differentiated from the current spec text using a > background color. > > http://www.html5accessibility.com/tests/img-longdesc.html Question: Why did you conclude that @longdesc should make img interactive content? ]] If the element has a usemap or longdesc attribute: Interactive content. [[ *That* was an error in the previous change proposal. Why? Because HTML5 forbids nesting of interactive content. [1] Which means that two of the use cases that @longdesc is claimed useful for in HTML4, would be forbidden: <!--would be forbidden:--> <a href=* ><img longdesc=* src=* alt=* ></a> <!--would be forbidden as it would represent 2 interactivisms--> <img longdesc=* src=* alt=* usemap=#* > I've said this before (but perhaps not in public-html): HTML5 has really cut the corners when it comes to nesting of interactive content. In HTML4 and XHTML1, there e.g. was no restriction on wrapping a link around an image map: <a href=*><img src=* alt=* usemap=#*></a>. But this is not permitted in HTML5 anymore. @longdesc should be considered more like @cite of <blockquote> - which aren't interactive content. Or what if there will be an @aria-describedAT="URL" at some point in the future? Should *that* also make the element interactive? I hope you can update your experimental spec text to reflect this. [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/introduction.html#restrictions-on-content-models-and-on-attribute-values -- leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 21 March 2011 07:46:10 UTC