- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:39:47 +0000
- To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, WCAG WG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, kirsten@can-adapt.com
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmpUBXZ=c9YVcxMUMWaRo_psd3cAT7GLi3pdiii-XWbnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Janina, Over time and due to experience and understanding, consensus positions change. This document is a useful historical reference, but does not represent the current (lack of) consensus position on the issue. -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 22 November 2013 23:54, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: > David: > > As a point of information, the wider WAI community has already expressed > a view on this. We did so back in 2009, after almost a year of > teleconferences nd > email discussions by way of presenting a coherent approach to the > HTML-WG. > > The document we produced is entitled, "WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on > Text alternatives in HTML 5," and is available at: > > http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5.html > > So, while it's always good to revisit old thinking, it should not be > forgotten that we've already covered this ground, and that we covered it > quite extensively. > > Janina > > > David MacDonald writes: > > On behalf of the WCAG working group, I have an action item to solicit > > responses from the wider community regarding a proposed amendment to WCAG > > failure technique F65 regarding missing ALT. Currently; if an <img> > element > > is missing from an ALT attribute the page fails WCAG SC 1.1.1 Level A. > Some > > are proposing that we allow authors to use the aria-label, > aria-labelledby, > > and title attributes INSTEAD of ALT. > > > > So under the amended failure technique NONE of the following would fail > > WCAG: > > > > <img src="../images/giraffe.jpg" title="Giraffe grazing on tree > branches"/> > > > > <img src="../images/giraffe.jpg" aria-label="Giraffe grazing on tree > > branches"/> > > > > <img src="../images/giraffe.jpg" aria-labelledby="123"/> > > <p id="123"> Giraffe grazing on tree branches</p> > > > > As you can imagine there are strong opinions all around on this so I > > suggested we get a sense of what other groups such as the HTML5 A11y TF > and > > PF think. > > > > Those in favour of the change provide the following rational: > > > > --These alternatives on the img element work in assistive technology > > --The aria spec says these attributes should get an accessible NAME in > the > > API > > http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#textalternativecomputation > > --They say it's easy to teach beginner programmers to just always use an > > aria label on everything, rather than requiring a label on form fields > and > > alt on images > > --They feel as a failure F65 is very strong if fails a page for missing > ALT, > > especially if other things work, and they would like to soften it to > allow > > other things that work. > > --html 5 allows a <figure><legend> combination instead of alt, so they > feel > > WCAG will have to change F65 anyway to allow a figure with a legend, and > > that helps open the door to this discussion > > > > Those in favour of the status quo (which fails missing alt text) provide > the > > following rational: > > > > --aria-label, labelledby and title, are not really suitable attributes > for > > img alternative text because they implies a label or title, rather than > an > > alternate text, so it is not a semantic equivalent > > --title is not well supported > > --some feel that the aria spec is not in any way suggesting these as > > replacements to ALT. > > --aria instructs authors to use native html where possible, and they > could > > not come up with viable use cases of omitting alt text > > --there are hundreds of millions of dollars invested in current > evaluation > > tools, and methodologies, and this would represent a major departure from > > one of the most basic accessibility convention, that is almost as old as > the > > web and is the "rock star" of accessibility > > --it could cost a lot of money to change guidance to developers etc..., > and > > muddy the waters on a very efficient current evaluation mechanism > > --when the figure/legend is supported by AT we can amend F65 but that is > a > > different issue and the semantics of this construct are OK for text > > alternatives, rather than the label/labelledby/title options > > --it may cause some confidence problems to WCAG legislation, because it > > represents a strong loosening to a fundamental Success Criteria, an > > unnecessary change that doesn't help the cause of accessibility, but just > > complicates things > > --ALT is better supported and the text appears when images are turned > off. > > --initial twitter feedback from the community is strongly against > changing > > this failure > > > > > > There are probably other reasons on both sides which we hope to hear ... > but > > these should start it off. Please give your opinions and reasons. > > > > Current technique here: > > http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/F65.html > > Proposed failure here (see test procedure) > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > David MacDonald > > > > CanAdapt Solutions Inc. > > Tel: 613.235.4902 > > http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100 > > www.Can-Adapt.com > > > > Adapting the web to all users > > Including those with disabilities > > > > > > -- > > Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 > sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net > Email: janina@rednote.net > > Linux Foundation Fellow > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > Chair, Protocols & Formats http://www.w3.org/wai/pf > Indie UI http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/ > > >
Received on Saturday, 23 November 2013 08:40:55 UTC