Re: example spec text for longdesc

Laura Carlson, Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:43:45 -0500:
> On 3/26/11, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> Instead of suffixes, we could require the @longesc URL to point to a
>>> #fragment ID.
   [...]
> So the spec text could read something like:
> 
> "Conformance checkers and authoring tools should inspect the URL and
> issue a warning if they suspect that the description resource is
> unlikely to contain a description of the image (i.e., if the URL is an
> empty string, or points to the same URL as the src attribute unless
> the document contains an id that matches a longdesc#anchor, or if it
> is indicative of something other than a URL.)"
> 
> Henri, could that spec text work for conformance checking tools? Do
> you think that requiring #anchor on all longdesc attributes would be
> better?

Henri: Shouldn't checkers validate @cite too?

* Above, Laura suggests that @longdesc's pointing to current page 
should be checked the same way that usemap="#*" is checked. If you 
agree with that, wouldn't an error message as well be in place when a 
@cite points to an non-existing place on the current page? (Currently, 
Valdator.nu does note wine about that.)

  Justification:
  1: Helping authors.
  2: Same rules for @longdesc & @cite would be a benefit.

* And what about a requirement that not only @longdesc but @cite as 
well must point to a fragment identifier - on this or another page?

  Justifications:
  1: Bogus links cannot be a problem to @longdesc only?
  2: If the linked page doesn't have a relevant fragment, 
     then perhaps a normal link is good enough?
  2: Same rules for @longdesc & @cite would be a benefit.
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Sunday, 27 March 2011 15:29:24 UTC