My reading of what you say below, Sam, is that unless a CP in the ISSUE-30 process directly proposes it, then - regardless of the outcome of ISSUE-30, evaluation of subsequent proposals to use @longdesc for other elements - <iframe>, <video>, <whatnot>, will be deferred to HTML.next. By contrast, my impression is that some longdesc supporters think that, if @longdesc is 'instantiated' for <img>, then we can - within the HTML5 time frame - subsequently discuss it for other elements. Leif H Silli Sam Ruby, Sat, 17 Mar 2012 10:38:46 -0400: > On 03/17/2012 09:38 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> >> QUESTION: Can you give us a hint about how it would be evaluated if >> Lauras - or another - proposal promotes @longdesc for *any* element >> that have role=img, versus Laura's current proposal - which - though it >> also contains language which says that one could expand its use - >> allows it on the img element alone? > > *IF* such a proposal is brought forward to expand its use, then we > will evaluate it. > > Meanwhile, we desperately need to break out of the following state: > > 1) We need a decision *now* on longdesc > 2) We are still working on proposals for longdesc > 3) The chairs are jerks > > It is theoretically possible for longdesc to be 'instated' as a valid > attribute on img in HTML5, but removed in HTML.next. It is also > theoretically possible that longdesc is a valid attribute on img in > HTML5, and will be valid on div too in HTML.next. > > If people are happy with one or more proposals as they exist today > for issues 30 or issue 204, then I have a simple request: STOP > WORKING ON THEM! If not, then my request is: bring forward a > complete proposal: NOW! > > We need to get HTML5 behind us, so that we can get to have this fun > all over again. > > - Sam Ruby > > > > >Received on Sunday, 18 March 2012 12:33:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:50 UTC