https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4901
--- Comment #34 from Michael Zajac <[email protected]> 2011-05-19 03:15:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #33) Fair enough, Aryeh. I was arguing for using lang, which which the standards require, not for hreflang, which they do not (although I don't see any reason not to use HTML markup such as hreflang to tag known page elements, when each page already has about 30 kB of non-content markup, scripts, and style sheets). > For the sake of argument, please interpret my use of "metadata" to mean > "information that's served in the webpage but doesn't noticeably affect the > behavior of regular browsers". I don't accept that there's a useful concept of regular browser. People using screen readers use them to operate (“regular”) desktop browsers. Is the Google search indexer a regular browser, or is Google Language Tools? Or Mobile Safari on an iphone used by a blind person? What about the screenscrapers used by the countless sites that syndicate wikimedia sites? > None of your references appear to have anything to do with hreflang, as far as > I can tell. Am I mistaken? They all seem to be about lang. Right. > I'd be happier > if we had data about actual screenreaders that benefit (since WCAG et al. can > be pretty ivory-tower sometimes). We're not experts, and we don't have a detailed comprehensive survey of accessibility software and hardware capabilities, nor are we ever likely to. The best we can do is follow accepted, unchallenged standards. If you do have information that disputes them, I would be interested. But grumbling about them is unhelpful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
