- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:31:19 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Schnabel, Stefan" <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, WCAG WG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "public-comments-wcag20@w3.org" <public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "kirsten@can-adapt.com" <kirsten@can-adapt.com>
Steve Faulkner, Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:24:29 +0000: > Hi Stefan, this only works for criteria that are solely contingent upon > accessibility APIs exposing information to AT. > > For the case of alt it has not been agreed that this is the case. > > Ramon, for example brought up the case of a low vision user who turns off > images in the browser because the information in the images is difficult to > perceive, but the alt text exposed as text by the browser is not. This > involves no AT. > > In this case what is required for all of the suggested alternatives > aria-label etc is that they are displayed in place of an image when an > image is not displayed. This is currently not the case. If we can interest > browser implementers exposing aria-label as text in this case then we have > a practical alternative to alt. So, to replace @alt with an @aria-* attribute, would be to do the opposite of what the WCAG Robustness principle requires: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#robust Leif H Silli
Received on Thursday, 28 November 2013 12:31:53 UTC