WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: LONGDESC in HTML5?

for

From: John Foliot
Date: Sep 24, 2010 7:21PM

Jukka K. Korpela wrote:

>> It's waste of time. Nobody outside the small circle of accessibility
>> advocators ever took longdesc seriously, still less used it in
>> authoring.
>
> In which point exactly? Can you cite actual use of longdesc attributes
> in a
> manner that makes content more accessible to real people using real
> browsers?

* Opera and iCal take @longdesc seriously by providing in-browser support.
* The Firefox plugin is a serious attempt to plug a hole in Firefox (due
to its lack of native support)
* JAWS, WindowEyes, Hal/Supernova have taken serious steps to support
@longdesc

* Laura Carlson's list of examples in the wild of @longdesc usage
represents a serious attempt to show where longdesc is being used
* Web cartoonist Kyle Weems (CSSquirrel) has both a perfect use-case for
longdesc, as well as demonstrable use of it on his site. The fact that he
also uses a 'hack' with aria-described-by pointing to an off-screen link
to the long description of his cartoons is also a serious illustration of
why a mechanism such as longdesc has value, as well as proof that other
techniques available to authors are less useful.

*Dreamweaver, XStandard, CKEditor (to name but 3) WYSIWYG editors provide
content authors with a means to include longdesc in web pages
* Michael Fields (a Portland based web developer) recently created a
WordPress plugin that allows authors to include longdesc into their
WordPress blogs. Michael is neither a "web accessibility" specialist nor
Standards wonk - he is simply a web developer who recognized both a useful
solution, as well as addressed a perceived (and real) need in the
authoring platform of his choice.

Are you suggesting that none of these examples are serious or real? I
might also point out that, from a technical perspective, the longdesc
attribute creates its own node in the DOM, after which any DOM aware web
technology can take that data-point and process it as it chooses.
Seriously.

>
> You are not citing any actual usage, still less pointing out why it
> would be
> beneficial in accessibility terms, just referring to a compilation of
> accessibility policies which are, to be honest, just documents people
> have
> produced without making anyone change their authoring habits.

Again, I refer you to Laura's research page
(http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/research/ld.html), which has numerous
documented uses of longdesc in the wild. Places like the United Nations,
US Federal and State governments, other European governments as well as
academic institutions and commercial companies such as Oracle.

>
> > Removing the existing @longdesc attribute from HTML5 breaks the basic
> > premise of HTML5 being backward compatible, and for those who *must*
> > use @longdesc due to their workplace requirements, it effectively
> > means that they cannot move towards using HTML5.
>
> That's fine. They, or the powers behind them, must stop pretending that
> some
> illusionary attributes promote accesssibility. It would be wrong to
> help
> them in living in such illusions (avoiding all the hard work that real
> accessibility might imply).

Are you suggesting then that using longdesc breaks accessibility? That the
best way to promote accessibility is to not use longdesc when it is
appropriate?

Pretending that authors will always provide either in-the-clear text that
repeats what is visually obvious to sighted users on the same page as a
complex image, or provide a visual link to that information elsewhere ("D"
Link?) will somehow improve accessibility, and that they will always do
this? Let's see what one designer says to that:

"However, as a designer, I object to being told I must use those
links myself. As you've pointed out on Twitter, the current design of the
comic page would certainly support a hyperlink wrapping around the comic.
However, my upcoming design already has functionality mapped to clicking
the comic, and won't have space for a large "transcript here" hyperlink
sitting around in plain sight (which would be distracting for the 99% of
my users that are sighted). In that scenario, longdesc can and does serve
my needs."
http://www.cssquirrel.com/2010/08/16/comic-update-alone-in-the-pitch-black
-dark/#comment-32126


>
> > Nothing you can say
> > or argue removes this fundamental fact.
>
> There's no "fact" involved. Please don't obscure things by calling the
> policies that someone might favor "facts". Real facts are things that
> all
> people agree on, because they are directly observable - no need for
> "policies" and "opinions".

FACT: If you, as an author, are *mandated* either by policy or law to use
@longdesc when appropriate (and as recommended by numerous Best Practices
documents, including the W3C's own WCAG 2 Techniques document) and HTML5
simply does not have that attribute as a viable mechanism, then you cannot
use HTML5, as to do so would mean you can't use longdesc, yet the policy
says to use longdesc. Are *they* willing to stake their employment on the
logic of Jukka Korpela, or rather on what the suits say you must do?
Rhetorical question.


>
> > *EVERYONE* who has worked on this issue within the standards bodies
>
> ... must have observed how far they are from the reality. (I presume
> you
> mean real standars bodies, such as ISO and CEN, not industry consortia,
> which tend to be a little less unrealistic.)

ISO? Like ISO/IEC 15445:2000 which clearly includes the longdesc attribute
as a valid and legitimate attribute of <img> in their HTML specification?
http://www.scss.tcd.ie/misc/15445/UG.HTML#IMG

It seems as well that the ISO have a fair bit of faith in the W3C as a
Standards body:
"In January 2007, W3C became an Approved RS Originator
Organization (ARO) for ISO/JTC1. This means that ISO/JTC1 standards may
refer to W3C Recommendations 'as-is.' "
http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison#dejure


>
> And nobody can cite an example of its being actually useful. And I mean
> the
> URL of a real web page, not a contrived and typically childish example
> of
> how it "might" be used.

I find it hard to believe that the numerous examples Laura Carlson has
compiled, such as the Public Service Commission of Canada
(http://www.psc-cfp.gc.ca/plcy-pltq/guides/structured-structuree/index-eng
.htm#fig1) the
US Department of Transportation
(http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/jpodocs/repts_pr/13669/section03.htm), or the UK
Health and Safety Executive
(http://www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/strategiesandplans/hscplans/strategicplan01
04/plan0104-09.htm) are contrived or childish. They are real examples of
how LONDESC *is* used.

JF