- From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 07:10:31 +0100
- To: achuter@technosite.es, "MWI BPWG Public" <public-bpwg@w3.org>
- Cc: "Appelquist, Daniel, VF-Group" <Daniel.Appelquist@vodafone.com>
On Tue, 19 May 2009 15:24:11 +0100, Alan Chuter <achuter@technosite.es> wrote: > Jo Rabin wrote: >> A question on sprites: what happens to our bp1 stuff on alt text etc. >> (and what about accessibility aspects). > > As CSS is necessary for the use of sprites, they should only be used for > decorative images, which by definition do not require a text > alternative. If an image does require a text alternative then it isn't > decorative and shouldn't be done with CSS, so it shouldn't be a sprite > either. So icons or buttons shouldn't be made into sprites if they are > the sole way of conveying information. I think that this should perhaps > be made clear in the BP document [1]. We could point to WCAG 2; the "Techniques for WCAG 2" document says "Using CSS to include decorative images": The objective of this technique is to provide a mechanism to add purely decorative images and images used for visual formatting to Web content without requiring additional markup within the content. This makes it possible for assistive technologies to ignore the non-text content. Some user agents can ignore or turn off CSS at the user's request, so that background images included with CSS simply "disappear" and do not interfere with display settings such as enlarged fonts or high contrast settings. http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/C9.html Hugs, Bruce
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2009 06:11:32 UTC