W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2010

Re: CFC re ISSUE-31 Missing Alt

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:16:41 +0100
Message-ID: <o2q55687cf81004300316l6f699890y7385e56dfd61dfbc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
> This rationale doesn't match the change proposal cited. The change
> proposal, much like the spec, allows conformance checkers to _not_ report
> an error despite the lack of alternative text in specific cases.

Incorrect, the changes propose that under certain circumstances an
adequate text alternative for an image can be derived from the content
of the figcaption element or the text content of an element or
elements referenced by an aria-labelledby attribute on the img
element. Both of these mechanisms involve the association of text
displayed by default. the association aids AT users who cannot always
make the implicit association between text near an image.

>removing the explicit mention of a user interface feature for handling non-Web content

Why do we want to to provide explicit advice for "non web content",
that is a slippery slope, especially when it has often been stated
that we should not be basing features or conformance  on uses in
environments that are not the open web.


>removing the permission to use the title="" attribute for its
> intended purpose,

We didn't decide that the "intended purpose" of the title atttribute
on an <img> element is to provide an acceptable text alternative. Has
that been decided? If so by whom?

> and adding three ways to use ARIA to make invalid documents valid, which is a layering violation as previously discussed.

I don't think we added the ARIA emthods in order to make "invalid
documents valid" we viewed them as acceptable alternatives, you do not
due to the layering violation issue, this is something that will have
to be discussed by the taskforce and HTML wg in order to resolve this
issue.


regards
stevef

On 30 April 2010 00:55, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Janina Sajka wrote:
>>
>> Candidate Resolution
>>
>> RESOLUTION: The HTML-A11Y Task Force supports the change proposal at
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126 to
>> implement WAI Consensus Guidance that a missing text alternative should
>> be an error in conformance checkers. We expect the error text will
>> reference additional guidance on text alternatives in WCAG support
>> materials.
>
> This rationale doesn't match the change proposal cited. The change
> proposal, much like the spec, allows conformance checkers to _not_ report
> an error despite the lack of alternative text in specific cases.
>
> In fact the change proposal merely changes the ways that an author can
> omit alternative text, removing the explicit mention of a user interface
> feature for handling non-Web content, removing the mechanism by which we
> discourage WYSIWYG editors from stuffing alt="" attributes with bogus
> values, removing the permission to use the title="" attribute for its
> intended purpose, and adding three ways to use ARIA to make invalid
> documents valid, which is a layering violation as previously discussed.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 10:17:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:08 GMT