- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:20:30 +0000
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, public-html-a11y@w3.org, laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com, George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>, david.bolter@gmail.com, jbrewer@w3.org, faulkner.steve@gmail.com, mike@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com> wrote: > This is an unofficial draft of aria-describedat that Steve and I are working > on for ARIA 1.1. Mike, thanks for putting setting us up with a work page. > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/aria-unofficial/raw-file/tip/describedat.html Thanks for sharing. Some feedback. - One of the problems with longdesc has been that its data type is not obvious. The name should reflect the fact that it is a URL. e.g. "aria-descriptionurl" or "aria-describeaturl" would be better. "aria-descriptionurl" has the advantage of being a little harder to confuse with "aria-describedby". It surprises me that after all the problems with the naming of "longdesc" people are proposing adding a similarly ambiguous name. - What's the rationale for adding yet more attributes with the "aria-" prefix? - Note that "epub:describedat" is not actually part of the EPUB standard yet. - Please define what "content that describes the object" would be. For example, Wikipedia used to use @longdesc to link to metadata about the image but not to a text alternative. Presumably we don't want @aria-describedat to be used in this way? Again, would it be appropriate or not appropriate to use this attribute to link to a transcript for media? Would it be good to distinguish between descriptions and transcripts? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 22:21:22 UTC