- From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:49:34 +0000 (UTC)
- To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Nope. Even WinEyes does not recognize longdesc on same page. Both JAWS > and WinEyes do nothing even if you give full path of longdesc that > links to same page. Then they're violating the spec. <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#adef-longdesc-IMG> The longdesc attribute's value is a URI, which can be fully-qualified, relative, high in vitamin C, turbocharged, or whatever else complies with the specification. A user agent must then deal with the URI _qua_ URI. (Mozilla on Macintosh gets this semi-wrong: You have to copy and paste the address. Apparently Windows Moz makes it a link directly.) > It's entirely possible that longdesc isn't the best technique to use, > and in fact an explicit text link might not always be the best thing > either-- I would be interested in finding/learning about techniques that > would establish an explicit association between an image and its > description that don't necessarily employ a linking technique, rather > something that a user agent could identify and report (at the user's > discretion, for example). How is the user agent, which is merely a dumb machine, going to associate the two without "a linking technique"? Anyway, while long descriptions of all sorts are interesting, they are rarely needed. Even finding a large enough corpus of data to compare techniques is difficult without manufacturing unrealistic test cases. -- Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/> Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Friday, 24 September 2004 16:49:41 UTC