- From: Jonathan Cohn <jonathan.cohn@cambiumassessment.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:28:45 +0000
- To: Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>
- CC: Stephane Deschamps <w3c@nota-bene.org>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
What is the suggested pattern for providing additional information about a graphic at this time? Is it Figure with fig figcaption? I would think this not ideal for more explicit descriptions of graphics. Or perhaps a link surrounding the omg often used to bring up a full size image should also have text about the image. Thanks! Jonathan Cohn > On Jan 14, 2022, at 7:17 AM, Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com> wrote: > > There is almost no support for longdesc in browsers or by screen readers anymore. I haven't checked since June last year, but the results at that time are documented here: > > https://test-cases.tink.uk/longdesc/index.html > > > Léonie. > > On 14/01/2022 07:02, Stephane Deschamps wrote: >> Hello fellow accessibility people, >> >> I remember the age-long battle to keep longdesc into the spec, and then moving it to its own[1] as the main spec marked it as deprecated. It is now marked as **obsolete and non-conforming** in the HTML5.2 spec[2] so I'm at a loss as to whether one can implement it or not, considering one official recommendation versus the other. >> >> Could anyone clear that up for me please? >> >> Thanks for any input! >> Stephane >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html-longdesc/ >> [2] https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features >> > -- > Director @TetraLogical > https://tetralogical.com > >
Received on Friday, 14 January 2022 14:29:02 UTC