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

Re: why are we pursuing this idea? (was: Implementation Details request on Issue 204 Decision)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 16:10:03 +0200
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Chaals McCathieNevile <w3b@chaals.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120821161003906476.d2364831@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Steve Faulkner, Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:49:39 +0100:
> hi leif
> 
>> where the AT would - when presenting the link as a long description
>> link - ignore the textual content of the anchor and only present its
>> URL to the user as a long description link. That is what Firefox does
>> now, already.
> 
> not entirely correct
> 
> firefox exposes the text content of the link as the images accessible
> description (not accessible name) this description may not be
> announced by some AT on images.

Thanks for that. So the text of the 'longdesc linked' link is not lost 
- it is just treated as part of the image. An important correction of 
what I said, I agree.[1] 

However, it then seems to me that I was correct in saying that the link 
gets presented as a longdesc link. That is: without its normal link 
text - and instead with a generic longdesc announcement. (I heard that 
announcement when testing with JAWS.)

[1] In addition it gets read twice,  I suppose, when AT continues with 
the element after the <img> element.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 14:10:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 21 August 2012 14:10:39 GMT