W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: 2.4.4 WITH PDF'S

From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:34:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <872943.6354.qm@web46109.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, gv@trace.wisc.edu
You mentioned some of the items can only pass if "ambiguous to users in general".
 
What should I look for in my text link to determine if it is or is not "ambiguous to users in general".?
 
This is to help determine the approach is correct or not.

--- On Tue, 8/11/09, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:


From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: 2.4.4 WITH PDF'S
To: "Chris Reeve" <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, gv@trace.wisc.edu
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 9:07 AM


On 11/08/2009 08:09, Chris Reeve wrote:
> Yesterday I suggested to the forum using technique H30 using the alt tag
> with
> <alt="PDF format">,
> This suggesion was rejected because there was no image
> 1) If there is the pdf download logo can I use that with alt="PDF format"?
> 2) There was a differenent opinion on Succession Criteria 2.4.4 with
> technique G189 from a forum. The difference of opinion was file size and
> type is not required if there is only one file type.

In case anyone's wondering, the other forum Chris is talking about, but isn't sensible enough to link to, is transparently Accessify Forum:

http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=14519

Apparently, "The w3.org forum is confusing [him]".

> 3) Technique C7 (hide information) there was no feedback yet.
> 4) Can Succesion Criteria 2.4.4 pass with at least one Technique?
> At the moment, I am using G189+C7.
> Does W3 or the Working Group agree with statement #1, #2, and/or #4.

This is an interest group not a working group, the relevant WG wasn't chartered to provide ad hoc opinions, the relevant WG already made explained their thoughts on these matters in the documents you are citing, and I've quoted the relevant sections to you.

#1 is a question not a statement, but according to the W3C HTML 4.01 Recommendation (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/), <img src="pdf.png" alt="PDF format"> conforms to that specification if the "alt" text is a text alternative for the image referenced as "pdf.png".

#2 is a historical statement not something requiring a judgement call, but the W3C WCAG 2.0 Recommendation (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/) implies either /or/ neither will meet the Success Criterion /if/ "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, except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in general."

#4 is a question not a statement, but the W3C WCAG 2.0 Recommendation (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/) implies you can pass the Success Criterion with zero, one, /or/ multiple techniques /if/ "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, except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in general."

Clear?

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 17:35:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:32 GMT