- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 04:32:23 -0600
- To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi David, Thanks for the clarifications. Best Regards, Laura On 1/5/11, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote: > Hi Laura, everyone, > > I'm sorry, I was stunningly unclear on both points! > > 1) I meant to say, if you wish to have a page that shows an image that is > semantically distinct from the video which eventually replaces it when some > event happens, you have all the tools you need in HTML/CSS/script already, > and if you use these tools, then that image can be fully associated with alt > text etc. as it is a normal HTML image. So I was not talking of suppling alt > text, but of a semantically distinct image. If, on the other hand, the > image is a transient place-holder that has the same semantics as the video, > and is predominantly there to avoid having blank space on the page, then the > existing state is fine (provided we have good accessibility provisions for > the video itself, which I currently am unsure about). > > 2) It's a minor point about where text is. > > Contrast > <image src="..." alt="this text is in the markup" /> > with > <image src="..."> > <alt lang="en-US">this text is body text</alt> > </image> > > The first has user-presented text in markup; the second has it (correctly, > I feel) in the body text, where it's amenable to styling, language > attribution (as in this example), and so on. > > I fully support the design principle of providing accessibility (I hope this > doesn't need saying). > > > On Jan 5, 2011, at 6:14 , Laura Carlson wrote: > >> Hi David and everyone, >> >> Janina wrote: >> >>>> May I amend my assertion to say that the need for alt text is not >>>> controversial among the TF? >> >> David wrote: >> >>> If you *want* to show something that is semantically different, and needs >>> its own labeling, then it is easy to do; show a div >> >> Does this mean that you consider it more of a want than a need? Do >> you consider some sort of mechanism (other than a div) which supplies >> a text alternative for a video key frame is not a functional >> requirement for HTML5? >> >>> I am also concerned that 'alt' breaks a very fundamental design >>> principle. >> >> This is a core disagreement. "Access for people with disabilities is >> essential. This does not mean that features should be omitted if not >> all users can fully make use of them but rather that >> alternative/equivalent mechanisms must be provided. Example: The image >> in the img element is not perceivable by blind users. That is not a >> reason to drop the element from the specification, but is a reason to >> require mechanisms for adding text alternatives." [1] >> >> Best Regards, >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/AccessibilityDesignPrinciple >> >> Laura >> >> -- >> Laura L. Carlson > > David Singer > Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc. -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 10:33:44 UTC