Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
On 30 Nov 2008, at 16:40, Pentasis wrote:
I notice that it says in the spec under the img-section:
"There has been some suggestion that the longdesc attribute from
HTML4, or some other mechanism that is more powerful than alt="",
should be included. This has not yet been considered."
May I ask why it has not been considered (yet)?
Because there's an issues list of several thousand issues, and as such
not all issues have been considered. If we could do everything at once
we'd have a spec instantly. :)
Perhaps also worth noting that there's already been a quite epic amount
of discussion of LONGDESC, if you care to search the archives. I suppose
the text might be more accurate if it said "yet been decided".
A rough summary of the currently dominant view in WHATWG would be that
visible descriptions are more useful than invisible descriptions and
that in any case LONGDESC is poisoned by real-world abuse (
http://blog.whatwg.org/the-longdesc-lottery ).
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
