This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Add this step to the RDF section: ]] For each img and iframe element in the Document that has a longdesc attribute that resolves successfully relative to the element, generate the following triple: subject the document's current address predicate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby object the absolute URL that results from resolving the value of the element's longdesc attribute relative to the element [[ describedby will be included in XHTML+RDFa: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0086.html Citing POWDER: ]] 2.2.8 Property describedby RDF Property Label: described by Defined in: http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-dr/#semlink An RDF property to exactly match the describedby relationship type introduced in http://www.w3.org/TR/powder-dr/#assoc-linking and formally defined in appendix D of the same document, i.e. the relationship A 'describedby' B asserts that resource B provides a description of resource A. There are no constraints on the format or representation of either A or B, neither are there any further constraints on either resource [[
This seems like a peculiar thing to do while longdesc remains non-conforming.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: This would be utterly wrong. longdesc="" is not a description of the current document. It would also be a waste of time, since longdesc="" values are almost uniformly either bogus or useless, and the element is non-conforming so new valid documents won't use it.
(In reply to comment #2) > Status: Rejected > Change Description: no spec change > Rationale: This would be utterly wrong. longdesc="" is not a description of the > current document. An empty cite="" should be just as utterly wrong as an empty longdesc="" is. Thus, if this is a problem, the Microdata estraction algorithm needs to change - to cater for empty longdesc="" and empty cite="". > It would also be a waste of time, since longdesc="" values > are almost uniformly either bogus or useless, and the element is non-conforming > so new valid documents won't use it. That is true. Hence I liked this issue to Bug 10455, which seems to be the one that best tracks ISSUE-30.
The bug-triage sub-team thinks this is an issue of metadata, not of real people accessing information, thus we decided not to add the a11yTF keyword.
mass-move component to LC1