- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:11:06 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-html@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > If the new language requires a completely different architecture it is > unlikely to be adopted. Or maybe it is adopted, but the accessibility > features are not being put to use. I think it will be easier for > features to become adopted if they don't require a lot of rethinking, > but rather can be incrementally deployed. I think that's one of the > reasons it's important to look how authors are solving problems now. Providing fallback inside the new proposed <video> and <audio> elements is no different from fallback inside <object>, so architecture-wise I see no difference. P -- Patrick H. Lauke ______________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ______________________________________________________________ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ______________________________________________________________ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ ______________________________________________________________
Received on Saturday, 28 July 2007 13:11:30 UTC