Re: sellability of D-link vs. LONGDESC

to follow up on what Dave Raggett said:
> 
> I don't understand your comment. The proposed longdesc
> attribute doesn't require changes to graphical browsers.

This demonstrates that we need to baseline some concrete LONGDESC
proposal including behavior.

When I hear Jason White supporting LONGDESC, I believe he is
talking about a feature where when the image is not displayed,
the content of the resource pointed to by the LONGDESC is inlined
in the space that would otherwise be filled by the image.  A
link-traversal and page-change is not desired to get to the
verbal guide to the MAPped links.  It wants to be automatic and
inlined.

That is why I asked earlier what the proposal is.

The most beneficial version requires changes to graphical
browsers to support users with graphical browsers and access
devices acting on the output of the graphical browsers.  If
LONGDESC only generates a conditional _link_ to the mapped-links
guide, I think some votes would change.

--
Al Gilman

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 1997 14:07:30 UTC