W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2011

RE: link text 2.4.4

From: Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:38:59 +0200
To: "'Sailesh Panchang'" <spanchang02@yahoo.com>, "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Cc: "'WCAG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4ed550fa.d278cc0a.7c85.6b09@mx.google.com>
Goof point - F3 in the test procedure states:
"If an image does convey important information, the information is provided to assistive technologies and is also available when the CSS image is not displayed."
Sounds like the title attribute for a link would not constitute "availability" when the image is not displayed. Yet, as Loretta pointed out (if I understood her correctly), a title attribute might satisfy 1.1.1 because of the form control clause, which states that:
"If non-text content is a control or accepts user input, then it has a name that describes its purpose."
In http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20101014/H91 we find that the name for a link can be its text, or its title attribute. So, I think it possible that the title attribute would suffice for 1.1.1 if we apply a liberal meaning to the success criterion.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:spanchang02@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 8:18 PM
To: 'Loretta Guarino Reid'; adam.solomon2@gmail.com
Cc: 'WCAG'
Subject: RE: link text 2.4.4

Does 'linked text'   include CSS rendered images ... is that covered by intent  of SC 2.4.4?
It is also a SC 1.1.1 failure : see F3.
Sailesh

--- On Tue, 11/29/11, Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: link text 2.4.4
To: "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Cc: "'WCAG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2011, 12:26 PM









So really, for 2.4.4, which requires “The purpose of each link can be determined from the link text alone or from the link text together with its programmatically determined link context”,  the background-image of text would be called the “text” for link purpose, and the title would be providing the programmatic name for the link. Thus, no violation, but nonetheless a bad practice at best. 
 

From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 6:03 PM
To: adam solomon
Cc: WCAG
Subject: Re: link text 2.4.4
 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20101014/H65 is the nearest sufficient technique listed for SC 1.1.1. The use of the title attribute generally comes with lots of User Agent Notes, since user agent support for title is problematic for low vision and motor impaired users.

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:37 AM, adam solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com> wrote:

So, since according to http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20101014/H91 the name for an anchor tag can be in the title attribute, my example would not violate wcag.
With regard to the point Detlev made about custom stylesheets or schemes, is this a violation or a best practice?
Jon: the example I have is actually a link, but your point is well taken, and the link-cancel issue is becoming a widely used practice.


 

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com> wrote:
This would be covered by 1.1.1:

If non-text content is a control or accepts user input, then it has a name that describes its purpose. (Refer to Guideline 4.1 for additional requirements for controls and content that accepts user input.) 


 

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:39 AM, adam solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi everyone
Does 2.4.4 require there to be link text? Or, in cases where there is no link text (for instance a background image of text), a descriptive title attribute would suffice, since screen readers (at least Jaws that I know for sure) will read the title attribute when no text is present?
 
 
 
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2011 21:39:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 29 November 2011 21:39:45 GMT