Re: Issue 30 (Was: RE: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014)

On Sep 20, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> In fact, there is also a point that I would like clarification on.  I would like to know if longdesc is only ever intended to be used in controlled educational environments with significant copyright restrictions and for that usage universal adoption by mainstream browsers is not a requirement?
> 
> Or is there a universal need for "long textual descriptions" that is not currently being met?  If so, what changes are required in order to get browser vendors to sign on?
> 
> Key to this is the following data:
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012Sep/0295.html
> 
> Possible answers include that usage on "top 10,000 web sites home pages" is not a market that longdesc intends to serve, in which case that data is irrelevant except to point out that the messaging on longdesc needs to be updated to make it clear what the target market of this attribute indeed is.
> 
> Another possible answer is that this is indeed a market that long descriptions (by whatever the attribute is named) is a requirement for.  In which case, we need to take this data very seriously first the TF and ultimately the HTML WG as a whole will need to determine what corrective course corrections is needed.

I believe those answers have already been given, many times over the years.
Here are just two, from me, though I am nowhere near as familiar with this
stuff as the a11y folks.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0131.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0136.html

The latter is about summary, but it is the same market as longdesc:
enhancing the public record so that it better fits the needs of those
with assistive technologies, without changing the visual representation
for those who don't use AT.

....Roy

Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 19:28:14 UTC