Hi Alistair,
I don't see why that should be a violation, unless there are AT that don't
support it, in which case it's an accessibility support question. My take
on things generally is that if it works in AT, it passes, regardless of
what the specs say. WCAG doesn't tell you to follow specs, it tells you to
make something that works in AT.
Wilco
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Alistair Garrison <
alistair.garrison@levelaccess.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> <img role="img" src="someimage.png" alt="ok alternative">
>
>
>
> I wanted to gain reaction from the ACT TF with regard to this piece of
> code. Assume the alt text is a verified ok alternative description for the
> image.
>
>
>
> The question being – does this element have a valid or invalid mechanism
> for calculating an Accessible Name (with regard to a strict interpretation
> of aria, with no heuristic guessing)?
>
>
>
> Very interested to hear thoughts / comments
>
>
>
> Alistair
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
> Alistair Garrison
>
> Director of Accessibility Research
>
> Level Access (formerly SSB Bart Group)
>
>
>
--
*Wilco Fiers*
Senior Accessibility Engineer - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair Auto-WCAG
