RE: Is the Alt Attribute Dead? - Article on Updated F65

Katie, as you know I am the author of the post.  Sure the title may seem
provocative - but it wasn't meant to upset people -it was meant to start a
larger discussion in the community that had not yet begun.



I don't think I imply in any way that F65 is a failure for anything other
than img, area, and input type image.  My statement that you have
frustration over "A primary change is the allowance of new methods other
than the alt attribute for non-text elements (e.g. images)." And "Website
teams now have greater flexibility to provide text alternatives for
non-text content." was intended to harmonize with the language of ARIA 10
"ARIA10: Using aria-labelledby to provide a text alternative for non-text
content".  WAI's own technique ARIA10 states "alternatives for non-text
content" - so I'm not sure why my publicizing this accepted technique is
unexpected.



When I was thinking of different types of non-text content that could
benefit from alternatives I was thinking of elements that don't support alt
such as glyphs, character entities, poster images on video elements, SVG,
etc.  I was thinking of the allowance of title on elements as indicated by
the ARIA specification and the HTML5 Platform Accessibility mapping
guides.  I feel confident that for F65 and ARIA10 I was very clear that
these methods had to be accessibility supported.



If there is any mis-information in my post I'm happy to update it.  Please
feel free to comment on our blog and share your thoughts.



Best Regards,



Jonathan



*From:* Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, April 11, 2014 6:57 PM
*To:* w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
*Cc:* ryladog@gmail.com; Katie.Haritos-Shea@Chase.com; David MacDonald;
Bruce Bailey; Andrew Kirkpatrick; 'Joshue O Connor'
*Subject:* FW: Is the Alt Attribute Dead? - Article on Updated F65
*Importance:* High





Folks,



Please see the note I wrote below concerning SSB's article interpreting the
newly updated F65. I am sure this is just one of many articles, but, this
was one of my concerns all along. It takes so very little for
mis-information to get spread around so quickly......



While this article has generally good information and recommendations, this
one aspect, not being specific that it only applies to images, in
communication, is going to cause so much heart-ache by saying..."A primary
change is the allowance of new methods other than the alt attribute for
non-text elements (e.g. images)." And "Website teams now have greater
flexibility to provide text alternatives for non-text content."
Article URL:
https://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/2014/04/08/is-the-alt-attribute-dead/



The original email came into the our Accessibility Team office today from
another employee who gets SSB Bart news blasts.....





** katie **



*Katie Haritos-Shea*
*Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)*



*Cell: 703-371-5545 **|* *ryladog@gmail.com* <ryladog@gmail.com> *|* *Oakton,
VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile* <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>
*|* *Office: 703-371-5545*




*Sent:* Friday, April 11, 2014 6:23 PM
Sender Removed
*Subject:* RE: Is the Alt Attribute Dead? - Please Review



Sigh.....Yeah....No,



See, I *knew* this mis-understanding was coming, and I fought this - my
recommendation was to include alt for images **with** aria-labelledby
attribute (w/id), aria-label attribute and title - for a limited time
period (say 3 years), to drive ARIA uptake while providing full backwards
compatibility. I did have support for that idea, but, not by enough of the
right folks, so......



*Please NOTE:*  This failure is **ONLY** for images. The SSB article says
"non-text elements (e.g. images)", which is wrong. It is not 'an example of
one way' or 'such as' on images, it is *only* allowed for images *AND* only
in environments/situations where aria-labelledby(w/id)/aria-label/title are
proven to be *accessibility supported*. It is not intended for any other
type of non-text content.



*This is the updated Failure:*

F65: Failure of Success Criterion 1.1.1 due to omitting the alt attribute
or text alternative on img elements, area elements, and input elements of
type "image".
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/F65.html



** katie **



*Katie Haritos-Shea*



Sender Removed
*Sent:* Friday, April 11, 2014 1:49 PM
*To:* EC AccessibilityTeam
*Subject:* Is the Alt Attribute Dead?




------------------------------

*Is the Alt Attribute Dead?
<https://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/2014/04/08/is-the-alt-attribute-dead/>*

In March 2014 the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Working Group
(WG) published several new ARIA techniques for WCAG 2 and updated several
failure techniques. A primary change is the allowance of new methods other
than the alt attribute for non-text elements (e.g. images). This post
serves to describe the change in position, its roots, and implications for
use. A New sufficient technique to promote ARIA for elements that don't
support alt The sufficient technique ARIA10 was created to provide an
example [...]

*SSB BART Group <https://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> / Tue, 08 Apr 2014
14:27:03 GMT*

Sent from FeedDemon <http://www.feeddemon.com/>