Re: img@relaxed CP [was: CfC: Close ISSUE-206: meta-generator by Amicable Resolution]

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
> The information that an image contains important content, but does not have an alt is not already
> provided in the accessibility tree

Sorry?

When a developer knows an image does not contain important content,
they can use alt="" and it will not be exposed to the accessibility
hierarchy.

Equally when a developer does not know the alternative text for an
image, they can omit alt and it *will* be exposed to the accessibility
hierarchy.

AFAICT we don't need to add new HTML features or accessibility
mappings or AT behaviours for these cases.

The question in this thread is whether we should add a feature to
suppress/minimize linter warnings when a developer does not provide an
@alt because they don't know alternative text in order not to
encourage them, for example, to mislabel the image as *not* containing
important content via alt="". That's all.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis