Re: Response to comments on WCAG 2.0 Public Working Draft of May, 2007

We re-looked at this but level AA still looks like the proper level
for this.  This is not an absolute barrier to use since there are
techniques for accessing the information via user agent and OS
features.   There is a problem with alt text not alway being fully
visible for images but this is a browser bug and with WCAG 2.0 we are
not charging authors to do things to make up for user agent bugs.
Instead we are trying to get the user agents to behave properly.

Regards,

Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact

On behalf of the WCAG Working Group

On Nov 19, 2007 2:36 PM, Brian Hardy <Brian.Hardy@visionaustralia.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hello Gregg and Working Group,
>
> Vision Australia is unsatisfied with not having such an essential
> accessibility as images of text addressed in any way at the "A" level.
>
> The two SC (1.4.5 & 1.4.9) are both good, but as this is an essential issue
> for our organisation's primary client group, and we cannot accept them at
> the current levels, with nothing at "A".
>
> With respect to our other comments, some appear to have been addressed, but
> others we are not sure about at this stage. With Sofia Celic on leave and
> major national training obligations in the last couple of weeks, we are not
> able to indicate definitely whether the WG response is satisfactory or
> unsatisfactory in the time you have allowed. We may well provide additional
> comment on the Last Call working draft.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brian Hardy
>  Vision Australia Accessible Information Solutions
>
> Phone: (03) 9864 9525   Mobile: 0419 102 451
>  Phone International: +61 3 9864 9525
>  E-mail: brian.hardy@visionaustralia.org
>
>
>
> ===================
>  Comment 1: Prohibiting images of important text
>  Source:
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/200
>  7Jun/0299.html
>  (Issue ID: 2128)
>  ----------------------------
>  Original Comment:
>  ----------------------------
>
>  Currently WCAG 2.0 allows the use of images of text. Some
>  user groups with low vision may miss important content where
>  text within images contains important information. This may
>  be because the user requires a particular visual presentation
>  of the content, such as a particular font size or combination
>  of foreground and background colours to be able to perceive the text.
>
>  WCAG 2.0 currently has an advisory technique for Success Criterion
>  1.4.4 of "Avoiding the use of text in raster images". We do
>  not feel this is sufficient at an advisory technique status.
>
>  If images of important text are allowed these user groups
>  would need to "turn images off" to be able to apply their
>  presentation needs to the text alternative. Here are some
>  problems with that:
>
>  - This is something most users would not know of, let alone
>  how to do it.
>
>  - In Internet Explorer (still the most common use browser)
>  the user would be required to make changes in the 'Advanced'
>  tab (in Internet
>  Options) to stop image downloads. Not many people are
>  comfortable making changes in the "Advanced" area of any
>  program. Also, the setting to display all of the text
>  alternative of an image would be required (again an
>  'Advanced' setting in IE).
>
>  - Image text alternatives do not necessarily render at the
>  same size as the surrounding text
>
>  - Viewing a page with image text alternatives potentially
>  results in content being shifted so as to confuse the visual
>  reading order; overlapping image text alternative with other
>  text in the page; and cropped image alt text; generally
>  making the content harder or impossible to read.
>
>  - users may not be able to change browser settings in some
>  circumstances (such as at their place of employment where
>  access to settings is prohibited or limited)
>
>  Another important area is that of accessing image maps. How
>  would a user accessing pages with images off necessarily know
>  of the presence of an image map, let alone be able to access
>  the map regions? Most browsers do not render the text
>  alternative for and outlines of map regions. This issue goes
>  beyond images of text so we are also submitting a separate
>  comment regarding image maps.
>
>  Proposed Change:
>  Add a success criterion at Level A or AA that prohibits use
>  of images containing important text.
>
>  We acknowledge that the success criterion may need to include
>  some exceptions, such as where the important text is already
>  provided as text, or where logos are concerned.
>
>  ---------------------------------------------
>  Response from Working Group:
>  ---------------------------------------------
>
>  We now have two SC dealing with this:
>
>  at Level AA we have
>  "1.4.5 Images of Text (Limited): When an accessibility
>  supported technology exists to achieve the visual
>  presentation, text is used to convey information
>  rather than images of text unless the image of
>  the text can be visually customized to the user's
>  requirements."
>
>  We have also at Level AAA:
>  "1.4.9 Images of Text (Essential): Images of text
>  are only used for pure decoration or where a
>  particular presentation of text is essential to
>  the information being conveyed."
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>  Brian Hardy
>  National Manager Market Development
>  Vision Australia Accessible Information Solutions
>
> Phone: (03) 9864 9525   Mobile: 0419 102 451
>  Phone International: +61 3 9864 9525
>  E-mail: brian.hardy@visionaustralia.org
>
> 454 Glenferrie Road Kooyong Victoria 3144 AUSTRALIA
>  Postal: PO Box 860 Hawthorn Victoria 3122 AUSTRALIA
>
>
>
> NSW Office: 4 Mitchell Street Enfield NSW 2136
>
> QLD Office: Kent St, Woolloongabba QLD 4102
>
>
>
> Websites: www.visionaustralia.org.au/ais  |  www.louisbrailleaudio.com |
>  www.it-test.com.au
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 23:32:48 UTC