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

Re: Help with text alternative bugs related to HTML5 Change Proposal: "Replace img Guidance for Conformance Checkers"

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:11:40 -0600
Message-ID: <1c8dbcaa1003011411w73690b97r84489129c6db8a7e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Cc: Steve Faulkner <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, Matt Morgan-May <mattmay@adobe.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Hi Maciej and everyone,

> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>> wrote:
>> On Mar 1, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Laura Carlson wrote:
>> 5. Do we want a bug for Ian's number 3 "img element is part of the
>> only paragraph..."?  Gez recommended we do, as he is not sure how a
>> conformance checker would find that, and doesn’t follow the rationale
>> that the alt text is presentational and the paragraph provides the
>> context for it. Any suggestions for bug text?
>
>> A conformance checker could check for this condition. I am not sure what the
>> purpose of this exemption is. The only example in the spec is one where the
>> image is the sole content of the only paragraph it its section.

Should the bug be something like "Eliminate this exemption" ? Or "What
is the purpose of this exemption?"

>> 6. Although I personally disagree with it being a valid option, I've
>> drafted bug for the generator mechanism for img from document level to
>> element level as WAI CG said that they would condone it:
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Generator
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve the bug text?
>
>> Should the per-element generator indication be an attribute named
>> "generator"? It's not totally clear.

That is what I assumed from the WAI CG document. Any input from WAI
members who participated in the alt meetings last year?

> What is the value supposed to be?

That would be open to the a11y task force’s input. Any input from WAI
members who participated in the alt meetings last year?

>> 7. Although I personally disagree with it being a valid option, I've
>> drafted bug for a missing attribute, as WAI CG said that they would
>> condone it. Matt’s crowdsourcing idea is intriguing if it could be
>> implemented it would be great.  The bug is at:
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Missing
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve the bug text?
>
>> Perhaps the attribute should be something like "missingalt" or "noalt",
>> since it is the alt text that is missing, not the image.

I think "missingalt" or "noalt" may be too specific as it could be
missing any of the options in the set on just alt. Is
"notextalternative" is too long? Providing any one of the options in
the set would pass the validator not just alt.

>> 8. I've drafted bug to enable automatic validators to programmatically
>> determine the presence or absence of a set of text alternatives as
>> HTML4 did with alt:
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/ProgrammaticallyDetermineTextAlternatives
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve the bug text?
>
>> I don't understand this bug. Are you saying that it's currently not possible
>> for validators to programmatically determine the presence or absence of text
>> alternatives?

Yes. Is this a wrong interpretation? Will the validator throw an error
if one of the options in the set is not provided? Can the validator
determine a missing text alternative in HTML5 as it could for alt in
HTML4?

>> It seems possible to me. What am I missing? What specific
>> change in your Change Proposal does this relate to?

The primary premise.

>> 9. I've drafted bug for role="presentation" on img.
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/role=%22presentation%22
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve the bug text?
>
>> This bug text seems to lack rationale. While rationale is not required for
>> bugs, it is helpful.

Any suggestions for rationale from WAI members who participated in the
alt meetings last year or from anyone else?

>> 10. I've drafted bug for CAPTCHAs
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/CAPTCHA
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve it?
>> I have also filed a bug with Steve (and he agreed) to provide and
>> example in his document.
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9169
>
>> Seems like this is dependent on the "title" bug, because per the current
>> HTML5 draft using a title attribute is an appropriate way to provide
>> descriptive text for a CAPTCHA. Since the title bug has been rejected, I'm
>> not sure a separate bug is worthwhile (perhaps Ian will correct me if I'm
>> wrong).

Ian would this be rejected as a duplicate of the title bug?

>> 11. I've drafted bug for Webcams
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Bugs/Webcam
>> Any suggested text or ideas to improve it?
>> I have also asked Steve to provide and example in his document.
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9174
>
>> For this bug to be useful, I think you should give an example of what kind
>> of text is appropriate for a Webcam.
>> I think the idea of listing it here is that, while you may be able to
>> describe how the Webcam was set up, if it is unattended you may not know
>> what will actually show up. A Webcam pointing to your fishbowl would be easy
>> to describe, one that you have attached to a car or your clothing may not,
>> since it could be showing almost anything. I believe the idea is that a
>> figure caption or similar would be a more appropriate way to give some text,
>> since it is not a true textual alternative for the content. At least, that
>> is what I expect Ian would say, so you should probably give a specific
>> example if you'd like an outcome other than NEEDSINFO.

Any suggestions for rationale from WAI members who participated in the
alt meetings last year or from anyone else?

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Laura

-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Monday, 1 March 2010 22:12:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:03 GMT