Should I be thinking about the a11y of atompub? A little red flag is up
for me because of the discussion about
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gregorio-atompub-multipart-00 Earlier, on
the list, I asked about if it would make sense to package alternative
media using the MIME type multipart/alternative, e.g. both visual and
aural representations to assist those who are deaf or blind respectively
but got back these responses:
>From Aristotle Pagaltzis: multipart/* is forbidden as an Atom payload so
you won?t find any such feeds.
>From Ernest Prabhakar: As mentioned, Atom doesn't support multiparty. It
does support multiple enclosures, though. Are there any HTML conventions
we could perhaps adopt to identify accessible alternatives?
>From Brian Smith: My guess is that multipart/alternative content would
make things *less* accessible today, not more accessible. My feed reader
won't even display entries that have multipart/alternative content and no
tools (I know of) will help users author entries as multipart/alternate
So I wasn't going to think about mutipart any more and focus on file types
like SMIL that have the alternative content embedded. But maybe I still
need to think about multipart. What do you think?
Pete Brunet
IBM Accessibility Architecture and Development
11501 Burnet Road, MS 9022E004, Austin, TX 78758
Voice: (512) 838-4594, Cell: (512) 689-4155
Ionosphere: WS4G
