Re: Revert Request

Matthew Turvey, Fri, 27 Jan 2012 10:01:09 +0000:
> On 26 January 2012 14:12, Leif Halvard Silli  wrote:

> The change proposal endorsed by the HTML-A11Y-TF (which you were a
> member of at the time) clearly regards invisibility as an essential
> feature of longdesc. For example:
> "[longdesc] does not force a visual encumbrance or default visual
> indicator on sighted users. "

That's a statement about the *indication* of longdesc. 

> So a non-hidden longdesc would only meet 3 of the 10 use cases
> proposed by the HTML-A11Y-TF.

Again, you are discussing the *indication* of longdesc. My comment, by 
contrast, was related to the *content* which aria-describedby points 
to. I have *not* denied that the use of @hidden hides the content - it 
does of course has an advantage, in that sense. But despite what you 
have picked form the CP, the CP also describes how UAs can indicate to 
*all* users that there is @longdesc.

> Note this invisibility requirement appears to contradict WCAG2's POUR
> principles. If we want to go down that path, the HTML-A11Y-TF should
> probably file a bug on WCAG2 to change the acronym to POURI, with the
> "I" standing for "Invisible". Or "Imperceivable". Regardless, WG
> participants have had plenty of time to submit an alternative change
> proposal for a visible-by-default longdesc. HTML-A11Y-TF participants
> also had plenty of time to amend Laura's CP before endorsing it.

What you say does not completely make sense: @longdesc - and any link, 
such as <a> and <area> -  is forbidden from pointing to a @hidden 
section. But @aria-describedby could very well point to a @hidden 
section. However such a hidden section would be hidden from sighted 
users too. By contrast, @longdesc can just point to another page or 
section on the same page, that anyone could read.
>> Also if the zero change proposal, due to its current concurrence with
>> Jonas' proposal in this detail, now is considered to reflect what Jonas
>> proposed, then should it not offer offer the same use cases as Jonas
>> was asked to provide?
> It's unclear what you mean here. Could you elaborate?

I only mean that the ZCP should justify why it is necessary to be able 
to point to @hidden content.
leif halvard silli

Received on Friday, 27 January 2012 10:32:41 UTC