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

Re: hypothetical question on longdesc

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 18:24:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4F67B20A.9040403@intertwingly.net>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
CC: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
Thanks for this email!  Sincerely!  There clearly is a disconnect, and 
perhaps now we can get to the bottom of it.

On 03/19/2012 05:00 PM, Laura Carlson wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>> Meanwhile, we desperately need to break out of the following state:
>> 1) We need a decision *now* on longdesc
> We have needed an expedited decision for a very long time. It was
> promised but not delivered. Not providing one has been damaging.

What you appear to be saying is that you want a provisional decision 
that will immediately be reopened.  That is not something that I will 

If you need more a small amount of time to produce proposals, I think 
that could be accommodated.  Asking for a decision with the intention of 
immediately reopening the decision is not something I would support.

>> 2) We are still working on proposals for longdesc
> My completed issue 30  proposal has been ready since May 2011 right
> after the accessibility task force came to consensus and endorsed it.
> Call for Issue 30 counter proposals passed June 2011. You received one
> proposal from Jonas and one from Matt Turvey.
> You split Jonas' proposal from Issue 30 to make Issue 204 February 2012.
> Jonas requested that 204 be surveyed before 30.
> Are not issue 204 proposals ready to be surveyed?

We have yet to ensure that all the proposals for issue 204 have been 
reviewed, or even that we have received all such proposals.

>> 3) The chairs are jerks
> No one has applied that label but you, Sam. I do not think you are a jerk.

I will ask you to do one of two things: stop asking for an expedited 
decision on issue 30, or stop expecting to be able to immediately reopen 
that decision once it is issued.  I do not intend to support both requests.

>> 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.
> What I would ask is if it is decided that longdesc is included in
> HTML5 via Issue 30, is there realistically enough time AFTER that
> decision is announced for this working group to expand longdesc to
> other attributes in the HTML5 timeline?
> Or has Issue 30 been delayed for so long, it is now now impossible for
> that to happen?

The chairs are willing to allow the proposals to be amended up to the 
point of a survey, but not afterwards.  If you have something to 
propose, please do so now.  Beyond that, future work will go into future 
releases of HTML.

> Best Regards,
> Laura

- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 19 March 2012 22:24:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:50 UTC