- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:41:20 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 16/01/2018 15:31, David MacDonald wrote: >> It was dropped a while ago due to internationalisation issues, > > I agree languages other than English would be precarious. However, if an > English author wants to use the appropriate "purpose" as the label, I > don't think they should be punished by also having to add redundant > metadata. It's not "redundant". It needs to be part of a restricted set of machine-readable tokens to be...well...machine-readable. Otherwise, you enter the realm of heuristics again (where hypothetical tools that hypothetically do something useful based on a control/element's purpose need to guess what the purpose is based on natural language processing or similar). > >it would limit the terms that people could use in labels, which was > not acceptable. > > No, it would cause them to have to add metadata to provide that proper > "purpose" term. Alastair is right: authors would need to carefully craft their labels/accnames to make sure they trigger the right heuristics (and then that would require testing in all sorts of user agents, to make sure their natural language processing reacts consistently). > I think the AT should be able to figure this out... How? Machine learning? P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:41:44 UTC