- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:52:54 -0400
- To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- CC: 'Adrian Roselli' <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>, public-html@w3.org
On 09/20/2012 06:32 PM, John Foliot wrote: > > I suspect that maintaining the status quo with @longdesc today, while > working on a superior implementation of a method to deliver longer textual > descriptions would prove more fruitful for all concerned. I would agree with the bulk of what you stated in your original email, and want to comment specifically on the statement I quoted above. The current status quo is that we have a specification for longdesc in HTML 4.0 that is only implemented natively in one major browser. At the present time we have people who have pushed for a survey on two proposals, both of which appear to have overreach in different directions. The right answer is not to spend weeks on a survey and preparing a response only to then forward the matter onto the Director. We would not be doing our jobs if we did so. The right answer is to reject both proposals and tell the members interested in this topic to work harder on coming up with a compromise proposal. Come back with a proposal that either respects the status quo or attempts to change the status quo. I care not which. All I ask is that if you (collectively) decide to pursue the latter direction, please get the endorsement of those that would be affected by such a proposal. - Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 22:53:19 UTC