W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Revert request

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:04:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpvf0Jrbz=QM-dSQVwyTqfqbX5CbQ-1HdKFZ2E=_NQyADhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Sam,

Thanks for your email. I asked:

>> if the HTML Chairs now have a
>> concrete action plan with a timetable and concrete dates to expedite
>> ISSUE-30. Sam, Paul, and Maciej, do you have a plan? If so what is it?

What I read in your response [1] does not answer my questions. It
deflects and seems ambiguous with no clear timetable. If the chairs
are stalling the issue in hopes that new information will emerge, why
did they mislead us into believing that they would to expedite the
issue? This is very difficult to reconcile.

> So the task we face is eliminating all alternatives...

If that is the situation, let's obsolete <p>. We can all use <div> instead.

> As to aria-describedAt

Pitting aria-describedby, aria-describedAt, or any other solution and
longdesc against each other is counter-productive to accessibility. It
should not be an either/or situation.

HTML has native, built-in long description semantics with longdesc.
Keeping it core to the language keeps valuable semantics in HTML. The
idea of HTML obsoleting longdesc, a native semantic attribute, and
shirking off the responsibility of providing long description
semantics to ARIA, a bridging technology, is entirely backward. ARIA
should be used to augment missing native semantics of HTML as
necessary, not as an excuse to kill and to replace them.

Best Regards,
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0391.html
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2012 17:04:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:21 UTC