W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2012

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

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 05:04:56 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VnhO+DAKJ75AW57_fu9VT8zD2WMmrHpBJw_F7D2kwU0GA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
hi ben,

> 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.

you are making a false assumption, this only works if the generator
image developer controls where the content is published.
 The developer does not necessarily control the content of the page
the image is embedded in, so the developer cannot ensure that only
images that are significant have alt omitted.

> 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.

 that is not the scope of the discussion,  it has been identified that
providing an indication of the image significance to AT is an
important aspect for some involved which is why we are discussing ways
to do that.


regards
Stevef

On 4 August 2012 04:19, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
<bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 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



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Saturday, 4 August 2012 04:06:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 4 August 2012 04:06:09 GMT