Re: Is longdesc a good solution?

This is not speculation so I will rewrite it.

I workwith/teach many people and hav travelled many web sites.  I see 
longdesc much less often than I see just about any other accessibility 
feature and many of those whom I have worked with/taught have never 
encountered it at all.

This is not rocket science.  untill longdesc is used as extensively as alt, 
we cannot formulate enough imperical tata to model any kind of meaningful 
research on.  By the time that happens, I'll be long gone and I would like 
to see an accessible html5/1,000 in my lifetime.

Interestingly, when the editor puts something in the draft, usually taking 
something vital for accessibility, we see two things.

1> an absense of a good replacement.

2> research backing up the conclusion.  On the other hand, if ww ask that 
something be added/left in/returned, we are told we have to prove that it 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lachlan Hunt" <>
To: "Steven Faulkner" <>
Cc: "David Poehlman" <>; 
<>; "W3C WAI-XTECH" <>
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 7:00 AM
Subject: Re: Is longdesc a good solution?

Steven Faulkner wrote:
> david poehlmann wrote:
>> If I see a text link, it would have to be well labeled for me to know 
>> that
>> it is a descriptive link.  if I see a longdesc associated with a link, I
>> don't have to make a leap.
> This does not appear to be speculation, it appears to be the
> experience of one potential consumer of longdesc.

Sure, that statement of his is a is information about personal
experience.  But the statement you didn't quote is nothing but speculation:

"I see one problem with this that has already been mentioned. That is
since it is not widely encountered on the web, many will not know what a
long description is."

Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software

Received on Saturday, 6 September 2008 13:33:39 UTC