Hi folks, On 07.01.2015 06:09, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Jet Villegas <jville...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> The main downside I see is a potential "Mozilla removes features used by >> disabled people..." PR fiasco. I think we can avoid that with a better >> proposal that we do support. > Maybe Marco Zehe would be interested in removing it :-).
I actually am not. ;) The reason is not that I care about this feature. I honestly don't. But the noise that is to be expected from "interested parties" if we remove the feature is going to suck so much unnecessary energy that the cost calculation is clearly tilted towards just leaving it in. Besides: It does give us a competitive advantage over other browsers in the academic space and whereever other space longdesc may be used, or start being used once it is officially sanctioned by the W3C. Remember in accessibility world, the W3C word weighs much more than some on this list might think. We could have decided to support Apple's formal complaint to longdesc when they published it in August[1], but we didn't. I didn't care enough to waste energy on it, and those who now speak out against the feature didn't appear to care much back then, either. So TBL rejected Apple's complaint, and the extension moved to the state it is at now. My recommendation: Take a deep breath, and move on to more important things. Marco [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Aug/0028.html _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
