Hi Sylvia,
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 11:16:01AM +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Chris McCormickch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 09:24:42AM -0700, Charles Pritchard wrote:
There are two use cases that I think are important: a codec
implementation
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Chris McCormickch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
Hi Sylvia,
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 11:16:01AM +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Chris McCormickch...@mccormick.cx wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 09:24:42AM -0700, Charles Pritchard wrote:
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 14:19:23 +0100, Remy Sharp r...@leftlogic.com wrote:
Hi,
I know Bruce Lawson has mentioned that this has been brought up before,
but I couldn't find it in the archives (searching small), so I'd like
to bring it up again.
I suggested it in the w3c list, not this one.
I took some time this weekend to go through the HTML5 specification and
write warning language for features that are currently either
controversial or have long-standing bugs logged against them. It is
important that we draw attention to the least stable sections of the
HTML5 draft in order to
As an aside to Chris McCormick's comments, I wonder if it might also be
useful/possible/appropriate (or not) to provide access to media data in the way
that the ActionScript computeSpectrum function does:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Manu Spornymspo...@digitalbazaar.com wrote:
I took some time this weekend to go through the HTML5 specification and
write warning language for features that are currently either
controversial or have long-standing bugs logged against them. It is
important that
[If this has been discussed before, feel free to just point me there]
I frequently see the comment on this list and in other forums that
something is too late for HTML5, and therefore discussion should be
deferred.
I would like to propose that we get rid of the concepts of versions
altogether
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Aaron Boodmana...@google.com wrote:
[If this has been discussed before, feel free to just point me there]
I frequently see the comment on this list and in other forums that
something is too late for HTML5, and therefore discussion should be
deferred.
I would
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Aaron Boodman a...@google.com wrote:
[If this has been discussed before, feel free to just point me there]
I frequently see the comment on this list and in other forums that
something is too late for HTML5, and therefore discussion should be
deferred.
I
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
A feature that is not widely supported is a feature we authors can't
depend on. If we're lucky, we can put in some extra effort to work
around the lack and still deliver a decent experience. If we're not,
we simply
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Adam Shannonashannon1...@gmail.com
wrote:
If we never cut things off then the spec will really never be finished
before 2020.
Why does this matter? At the end of the day isn't the goal to have the
largest number of interoperable features? Consider one
On 8/9/09 7:10 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
[If this has been discussed before, feel free to just point me there]
I frequently see the comment on this list and in other forums that
something is too late for HTML5, and therefore discussion should be
deferred.
I would like to propose that we get rid
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Aaron Boodmana...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
A feature that is not widely supported is a feature we authors can't
depend on. If we're lucky, we can put in some extra effort to work
around the
Hi Manu,
Manu Sporny wrote:
I took some time this weekend to go through the HTML5 specification and
write warning language for features that are currently either
controversial or have long-standing bugs logged against them. It is
important that we draw attention to the least stable sections of
On Aug 9, 2009, at 6:32 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
3. A poll is created with two options:
[ ] Publish Ian's latest draft to address the heartbeat requirement.
[ ] Publish Ian's latest draft with Manu's warning language to
address the heartbeat requirement.
If we indeed have a draft,
In bug 7144, somebody wrote:
I am not sure if we are ditching ALT in favour of legend. You don't make
this clear here. Some of your alt examples here resemble longdesc, which
I am in favour of ditching completely. I'd be interested to see your
answer on whatwg list about this
It's not
On Thu, 9 Jul 2009, Sylvain Pasche wrote:
1) in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#common-dom-interfaces
When the attribute is absent, then the string represented by the object is
the empty string; when the object mutates this empty string, the user agent
must first add the
Shouldn't videos and audios (and maybe objects too?) also have
an alt attribute? A quick Google search tells me this has not been
discussed before.
Remco
At 1:12 +0200 10/08/09, Remco wrote:
Shouldn't videos and audios (and maybe objects too?) also have
an alt attribute? A quick Google search tells me this has not been
discussed before.
Your search was too quick...we are discussing accessibility
provisions for video and audio in general.
Am Montag, den 10.08.2009, 01:12 +0200 schrieb Remco:
Shouldn't videos and audios (and maybe objects too?) also have
an alt attribute? A quick Google search tells me this has not been
discussed before.
Hmm … subtitles have not been discussed before ? I don't think so.
Or what else do you think
On 10/08/2009 00:12, Remco wrote:
Shouldn'tvideos andaudios (and maybeobjects too?) also have
an alt attribute?
Bearing in mind:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#text-equiv
and
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#media-equiv
What function would alt on video serve?
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
My search was indeed too quick. I stand corrected.
Captions/subtitles seem like a very good idea for accessibility, but
in addition to that I think that an alt attribute would still be
appropriate for browsers that can't display the media at all. The alt
is a replacement for an external element
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Remcoremc...@gmail.com wrote:
My search was indeed too quick. I stand corrected.
Captions/subtitles seem like a very good idea for accessibility, but
in addition to that I think that an alt attribute would still be
appropriate for browsers that can't display
On Aug 9, 2009, at 2:16 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
If you limit your list to open issues that have been unresolved for
at least 6 months without meaningful progress (with reference to an
issue tracker issue, or a mailing list post, dating back at least 6
months) and if you remove the
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:15 AM, Tab Atkins Jr.jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Remcoremc...@gmail.com wrote:
My search was indeed too quick. I stand corrected.
Captions/subtitles seem like a very good idea for accessibility, but
in addition to that I think that an
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:22 AM, David Singersin...@apple.com wrote:
At 1:12 +0200 10/08/09, Remco wrote:
Shouldn't videos and audios (and maybe objects too?) also have
an alt attribute? A quick Google search tells me this has not been
discussed before.
Your search was too quick...we are
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 4:13 AM, Benjamin
Hawkes-Lewisbhawkesle...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 10/08/2009 02:22, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
E.g. when you tab onto avideo element, the alt tag could give a
very brief summary as to what the video is about, e.g. Elephant
Dreams video.
Don't the
27 matches
Mail list logo
