W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > May 2011

(unknown charset) Updated CP: require device independent access to @title

From: (unknown charset) Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 05:18:10 +0200
To: (unknown charset) HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110515051810696404.d8bc10e5@xn--mlform-iua.no>
I have updated my CP a final time (except for typos that may be 
discovered): 

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/EnTitle

	Summary: 

Before @title should be allowed to make an IMG conforming, HTML5 should 
make it a MUST that @title can be presented to all users. 

So, where Steve's CP focuses on authoring requirements and puts limits 
on what @title can be used for due to poor accessibility, this CP takes 
the opposite approach and makes it a requirement that UAs MUST provide 
device independent access to @title, whereas HTML5 (and Steve's CP 
doesn't touch this issue!) currently only makes it a MAY). 

The discussion that Steve initiated with the vendors showed that device 
independent access is not a pipe dream, for instance Charles came up 
with a solution within half a day. Device indpendent access can also 
help making other elements such as <abbr>, more accessible. It seems 
like a reasonable goal that HTML5 provides enhanced access to @title.

Finally, my CP recommends a warning - not an error - whenever @title is 
used without @alt. This in order to help authors to keep such authoring 
to a minimum and to avoid confusion of @alt with @title and vice versa.

Leif H Silli

Leif Halvard Silli, Wed, 11 May 2011 05:09:01 +0200:
> Leif Halvard Silli, Mon, 9 May 2011 23:41:17 +0200:
> 
>> It seems that Webkit's behaviour covered by what HTML5 says about 
>> repairing for lack of @alt:
>> 
>> ]] While user agents are encouraged to repair cases of missing alt 
>> attributes, authors must not rely on such behavior. [[
>> 
>> And I think that you could put it in your change proposal that HTML5 
>> says that authors are MUST NOT rely on such repair behaviour.
> 
> I have now put this into my own change proposal:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/EnTitle
> 
> Main difference from Steve's prop: a warning instead of an error 
> message, a different reading of the (browser) facts and other 
> justifications (plural) for revisiting the issue.
-- 
leif h silli
Received on Sunday, 15 May 2011 03:18:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:38 GMT