W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-apa@w3.org > March 2021

Re: [w3c/aria] Distinguish connotative / emotion rich decorative images from "purely" decorative ones (#1427)

From: Lionel Wolberger <lionel@userway.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 22:18:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHOHNHcFU48OFHzgURRj5cMbSMPvjsV8jFPfZR9LYv4tdeU33g@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
Cc: "w3c/aria" <reply+AAJL4434C7IWHTHZOV3JU7N6L7JIBEVBNHHDDMHOXY@reply.github.com>, W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>, public-personalization-tf <public-personalization-tf@w3.org>, "w3c/aria" <aria@noreply.github.com>, Mention <mention@noreply.github.com>
My two cents
-- +1 to connotative / denotative. The two terms reflect well my experience
in assessing whether to mark images as decorative or not.
-- alt="" is a very blunt tool and is prone to errors. I believe this has
been discussed at length elsewhere, in my words: alt = null does not
meaningfully communicate the motivation behind marking an image as
decorative (that is, not need announcement to users with screen readers, or
presentation it users relying on assistive technology),
-- both ARIA and Personalization would be proper venues, ARIA feels more
correct as a standard for this, but perhaps tactically it may be harder to
socialize and promote this change there.

- Lionel
Lionel Wolberger, PhD
COO, UserWay.org <http://userway.org/>
(914) 432-2637
LinkedIn.com/in/lwolberg <http://linkedin.com/in/lwolberg>

*Read UserWay's Latest Press Releases

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 2:04 PM John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> wrote:

> James writes:
> > Do we agree that ARIA is not the correct venue for this?
> Hi James,
> I'm not sure. Having ARIA @role values like this *may* be the correct way
> forward (justification: this is about fine-tuning how much information is
> announced by screen reader, as it is primarily focused on the accessible
> name/"alt text") - the impact on, for example, sighted users with cognitive
> issues is likely very close to nil (the personalization effort primarily
> driven by the needs of cognitively impaired users).
> Before closing this (unless the ARIA WG is vehemently opposed to looking
> at this), I'd like to run this up the flag-pole with both APA and the
> Personalization TF for their thoughts (both are copied on this response).
> My bottom line is that *I* think this is worthy of more discussion, but
> perhaps it's a tad early to settle on how to resolve the issue; I do not
> see this as either critical or urgent, but certainly important and useful.
> Can you wait a week for a response?
> JF
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 8:34 PM James Nurthen <notifications@github.com>
> wrote:
>> @sinabahram <https://github.com/sinabahram> @johnfoliot
>> <https://github.com/johnfoliot> Do we agree that ARIA is not the correct
>> venue for this? I'd like to transfer this issue to a better location for
>> this discussion - to me that is the personalization task force.
>> —
>> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>> <https://github.com/w3c/aria/issues/1427#issuecomment-802414773>, or
>> unsubscribe
>> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJL44YUYACBO5RP6H3R6A3TEKLYBANCNFSM4ZKNIT2A>
>> .
> --
> *John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Specialist
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
Received on Saturday, 20 March 2021 20:19:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:23:08 UTC