On Friday, September 7, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Adrian Roselli wrote: > > From: Leif Halvard Silli [mailto:xn--mlform-iua@målform.no > > > And this where I feel your "needless complexity" claim is undue: If we design > > <picture>, we do of course try to make it work *now* - *everywhere*. And > > that leads to complexity. It is unfair to use that against it unless you also > > include how complex it is to make @longdesc work *everywhere* now, as > > well. If you think it is *OK* to not make @longdesc work in NVDA and > > VoiceOver, then perhaps it is OK that the alternative to @longdesc does not > > work perfectly as well? > > > > > I am of the opinion that @longdesc exists and has support, even if the support isn't ideal, and so is the natural long text alternative content holder. There is already more support for @longdesc today than there would be for a <desc> element (or the absence of an element), particularly because the content of a <desc> element (or not-element) will be forced on users on older browsers who don't want or need it. Expecting authors to style that away without impacting accessibility seems like a far reach here. +1 Cheers, Aaron -- Aaron Gustafson @AaronGustafson aaron-gustafson.com
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 16:17:02 UTC