Change Proposal for not including longdesc=""
Revision as of 01:15, 11 February 2010 by Hixie (Created page with '== Summary == The longdesc="" attribute does not improve accessibility in practice and should not be included in the language. == Rationale == Several studies (listed in the r...')
The longdesc="" attribute does not improve accessibility in practice and should not be included in the language.
Several studies (listed in the references) have been performed. They have shown that:
- longdesc is extremely rarely used (on the order of 0.1% in one study). 
- when used, longdesc is extremely rarely used correctly (on the order of 1% in a study that only excluded obvious errors; below the threshold of statistical significance on one that examined each longdesc="" by hand).  
- AT users don't know that longdesc="" exists. 
- most users (more than 90%) don't want the interaction model that longdesc="" implies. 
No change to the spec.
- Stops authors from spending time trying to use a feature that they don't understand and that users don't want.
- Encourages authors to include suitable information in an alternative form that is more likely to be accurate.
- Results in better overall accessibility on the long term.
Conformance Classes Changes
No change to spec.