- From: Matthew Turvey <mcturvey@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 18:33:35 +0000
- To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- Cc: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 1 February 2012 08:41, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote: > Matthew Turvey wrote: >> >> Removing the HTML-A11Y-TF's "no visual encumbrance" and "no default >> indicator" constraints would certainly improve perceivability for >> sighted users, and the range of authoring options available :) >> > > It would be significantly more helpful if you bothered to try to understand > what those requirements actually state; specifically that the visual > encumbrance not be injected *in the web page* by the browsers, because (as > has been pointed out more times than I care to recall) this has an artistic > impact on the visual design of the page, a fact that even Jonas acknowledged > as a problem in his Change Proposal: > > "This is because page designers often have quite strict requirements on > the visual appearance of the page and it would likely negatively impact the > level of accessibility support if contents specifically for for example > screen readers had to be provided within those requirements." > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/DeprecateLongdesc > > Contrast that with proof of concept solutions such as the Opera "Tell Me > More" extension, which places the visual indicator in the browser chrome. > > Note that if the author does not have those kinds of design restrictions, a > possible solution might also be Dirk Ginader's jQuery solution, which > leverages the @longdesc attribute with an on-screen indicator. As well, if > the sighted end user is more concerned with having the longer description > visually indicated over "artistic purity" they could use a plugin such as > the Firefox "Longdesk" solution: > https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/longdesk/ (which I have > brought to the attention of the WG on more than one occasion.) Both of these > solutions are in circulation today, and both work with @longdesc. > > All 3 of these solutions also support the 3 key requirements of > discoverability, choice to consume or not consume, and preservation of HTML > structured content; requirements that using aria-describedby with hidden or > off-screen content simply cannot deliver. I've already explained why I think a normal link on the image meets these requirements: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Jan/0184.html > If however you Matt don't have those same artistic constraints, then by all > means you are welcome to provide any type of linking mechanism to your > longer textual description you desire: use an actual link, resurrect the "D" > link if you want, place the long description in the same page, hide it, > don't hide it, feel free to do whatever you please. There are no > "accessibility police" that will track you down and condemn your actions. > Just do not expect that because it works for *you* that it is the only > acceptable solution for every other author or user on the web. The arrogance > of that kind of suggestion is mind-boggling, simplistic and significantly > more "controlling" than the flexibility that those in favor of retaining > @longdesc have shown. > > JF I think the poor quality of the longdesc-specific examples in the wild confirms my own real world experience that this technique is never needed. For the record, "d"-links never worked either, for obvious reasons: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/1998AprJun/0096.html -Matt
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 18:34:03 UTC