- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 21:00:56 -0700
- To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Template for comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Draft and Support Documents Commenter: William Loughborough Email: love26@gorge.net Affiliation: Smith-Kettlewell Institute Date: 27 March, 2007 document W2 2) Item Number For example "Intro" for introduction, "1.1" for a guideline 1.1; "3.2.1" for success criterion 3.2.1; "H-56" for HTML technique number H-56 1.1.1 3) Part of Item (Heading) Enter the heading for the section you are commenting on. E.g. "Intent", or "Description", or "Examples", etc. Guideline 1.1 4) Comment Type (G, T, E, or Q) T 5) Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change) The fourth bullet in 1.1.1 says "If non-text content is pure decoration, or used only for visual formatting, or if it is not presented to users, it is implemented such that it can be ignored by assistive technology." The strong implication is that this provision is there to make for less "babble" of unwanted descriptions of items with little/no non-visual intent. This is typically done by using "" (null alt-text) in place of "alt", "longdesc", whatever and does make for a less-cluttered audio environment in the case of a screen reader. Of greater significance is that it erects an exclusionary wall around a blind user who might be working in a Web Shop and in order to properly deal with the elements in question would be shut out from meaningful communication with co-workers. This should be re-examined from that point of view. 6) Proposed Change (Be specific) "pure decoration" should not be exempt from descriptive mandates via text. It is OK to make it easy for some blanket filtering, perhaps by putting "decor" at the beginning of the alt-text and having the screen reader know therefrom to not voice that one.
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2007 04:01:35 UTC