W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1998

RE: D-link and LONGDESC (GL type stuff)

From: Charles (Chuck) Oppermann <chuckop@MICROSOFT.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 14:47:27 -0700
Message-ID: <E3A3FFB80F5CD1119CED00805FBECA2F038043E3@red-msg-55.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
It's important to note that LONGDESC was added to the HTML specification
after the 4.0 versions of the major browsers were already released or too
close shipping to change.  Additionally, the HTML 4.0 specification does not
contain any recommendations on how to implement this feature.

I've been trying to build consensus on exactly how LONGDESC should be added.
In the meantime, a Dynamic HTML script would do the trick by converting any
page that had a LONGDESC into D-Link.

Charles Oppermann
Program Manager, Active Accessibility, Microsoft Corporation
mailto:chuckop@microsoft.com http://microsoft.com/enable/
"A computer on every desk and in every home, usable by everyone!"

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au]
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 1998 2:33 AM
To: Suzan Dolloff
Subject: D-link and LONGDESC (GL type stuff)

In response to the question at the bottom:

LONGDESC seems to be a formalisation within HTML of the D-link 
convention. Unfortuantely as far as I know there are no browsers which 
implement it. So using it exclusively is probably much stupider than 
relying on D-links - at least they are accessible at the moment. My 
preference for using both is based on the real-world situation that there 
will be people relying on older browsers for at least the next year or 
so, and probably longer. (Remember that some blind users, for example, 
have decided to use IE3 in preference to IE4 for accessibilty reasons.)

The neatest way of including a D-link, which I saw at WWW7 presented by 
some ATRC folks from Toronto, was an image of the same height as the one 
being described, of minimal width ( 1 pixel for example ) with ALT="D-link".

Where images are not spaced (this can be specified) it would provide 
clean pages for design-oriented authors who are loath to leave little 
"D"s all over their pages, and a neat linking system that could be 
understood by all browsers and folks.

I am not sure if this is a slight extension to the convention, or if it 
is currently common to use image-based D-links.

Charles McCathieNevile

On Tue, 21 Apr 1998, Suzan Dolloff wrote:

> Hello.
> [snip]
> I'm wondering if you could elaborate on your reason for preferring D links
> in addition to, or in conjunction with, LONGDESC? From responses I
> the last time I mentioned liking D links, I take it most view that option
> as an interim solution. Personally, I'd hate to see a good idea go by the
> wayside, and I'm afraid D links will.
> Just curious.
> Ree' Dolloff
> designs by dolloff - http://dbdweb.com/
> Avenue Averil - http://www.concentric.net/~Averil/
> Fade to Black - http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/7757/
Received on Wednesday, 22 April 1998 17:47:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:01 UTC