Re: Split Issue 30?

On 2/12/2012 5:22 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com>  wrote:
>> >  On 2/12/2012 3:42 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>  >
>>>>> >>>  >    Jonas, you have a different perspective too. That's OK, too. Multiple
>>>>> >>>  >    viewpoints are a good thing. We are fleshing out real issues in this
>>>>> >>>  >    process.
>>> >>
>>> >>  It sounds like your only objection to allowing aria-describedby to
>>> >>  point to @hidden elements is that it will delay publishing a finalized
>>> >>  HTML5 spec. That is certainly an understandable argument, though given
>>> >>  the extreme inertia for changing semantics of existing features, I'd
>>> >>  rather spec the @hidden attribute correction from the beginning, than
>>> >>  wait to fix it in HTML6.
>> >
>> >
>> >  My comment was intended as: we should wait to break current behavior, until
>> >  HTML6.
> You keep saying that it will beak current behaviour. But that's not
> the case. The @longdesc is only deprecated, it is not removed from
> HTML5. All browsers will continue to support it. The only difference

It was in reference to trying to alter the dynamics of the @hidden 
attribute.

I'm more concerned about breaking @hidden than anything in @longdesc.

Last year, I thought that we may be able to deprecate @longdesc with 
ARIA, but after a few threads and some work with ARIA flow, I no longer 
hold that view. That said, I don't use @longdesc. I do use display: 
none. It's a critical primitive. @longdesc only applies to one element.

I'm sorry, this thread has really covered a lot of different topics and 
gotten lost. As a few have pointed out, @longdesc will go up to be 
challenged again. So it goes.

I hope we've very cautious with @hidden.

-Charles

Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 01:32:01 UTC