Re: Test in G68 does not seem to fit

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:01 AM, <noreply@w3.org> wrote:

>
> Name: Detlev Fischer
> Email: fischer@dias.de
> Affiliation: DIAS GmbH
> Document: TD
> Item Number: G68
> Part of Item: Tests
> Comment Type: technical
> Summary of Issue: Test in G68 does not seem to fit
> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> I have noticed a discrepancy between Technique "G68: Providing a
> descriptive label that describes the purpose of live audio-only and live
> video-only content" and the test included at its end.
>
> While the technique proposes the use of descriptive labels which are
> exposed to sighted users, the test at the end checks for text alternatives
> for non-text content that would only be exposed if the not-text content
> cannot be displayed.
>
> I think the currently included test does not apply to the technique as
> described.
>
> Proposed Change:
> New Test
> Check whether descriptive label matches / correctly describes live
> audio-visual content
>
>  ================================
Response from the Working Group
================================
We consider that ALT text is a sufficient label for non-text content per
this definition of Label.

The purpose of this technique is to be sure that people who cannot see know
what the non-text content on the screen is. If the person can see,
presumably they can identify the nontext content by looking at it. The
technique as written would ensure that people who cannot see are able to
determine what the nontext content is via its alternative text.   The only
reason that the text is removed in the example is simply to see if the
alternative text really did stand in for the function.

We think the use of the word "label" in this technique may be confusing,
since label is often used to mean visible text that identifies a control. We
are revising the technique to clarify this issue.


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