- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 17:13:31 +0100
- To: "Schnabel, Stefan" <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
- Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, 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>
Schnabel, Stefan, Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:09:21 +0000: > Redundant announcement of accessibility related info by AT using > heuristics is not concept issue but an AT implementation flaw. In this context, the point is to come up with uses cases for saying that one could just omit the @alt attribute if one includes the (right) ARIA attributes "instead". And if the only problem is the redundant announcement problem, then ARIA *can* solve that problem. (But, of course, may be AT could - via heuristics - solve it too.) … > Supporting an empty alt will ease the pain but this renders the > Giraffe to "decorative" (unfortunately). The reason it doesn't work is that it results in the same redundant announcement that we are trying to avoid. If an img with empty @alt has an aria attribute, then AT will not treat it as decorative. But, of course, someone with images disabled will not get any alt text for the image - for them it would probably be better with a dummy (alt) text of some sort. And this is also the reason why it, in such a case, might be better with an omitted @alt than an empty @alt. > Using aria-hidden is not > reflecting well the purpose of the technique "association of visible > text (used as caption for an image) with the image". This is true. The only *simple* method HTML5 seems to have for such association, is the <figure> element. Leif Halvard Silli > From: Steve Faulkner [mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com] > Sent: Donnerstag, 28. November 2013 13:51 > To: Schnabel, Stefan > Cc: Leif Halvard Silli; Michael Cooper; David MacDonald; Janina > Sajka; HTML Accessibility Task Force; WCAG WG; > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org; Gregg Vanderheiden; > kirsten@can-adapt.com > Subject: Re: Clarification of WCAG intent and meaning of techniques > [Re: WCAG considering amending F65 to NOT fail missing ALT text if > title or aria-label is present] > > Hi stefan, issue with this is > SR output: graphic Giraffe grazing on tree branches ... Giraffe > grazing on tree branches > > -- > > Regards > > SteveF > HTML 5.1<http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> > > On 28 November 2013 12:48, Schnabel, Stefan > <stefan.schnabel@sap.com<mailto:stefan.schnabel@sap.com>> wrote: >>> So, to replace @alt with an @aria-* attribute, would be to do the > opposite of what the WCAG Robustness principle requires > No. > > <img src="../images/giraffe.jpg" aria-labelledby="123"/> > <p id="123">Giraffe grazing on tree branches</p> > is equivalent since even if the image is missing the text describing > the image is still there. > > - Stefan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Leif Halvard Silli > [mailto:xn--mlform-iua@målform.no<mailto:xn--mlform-iua@m%C3%A5lform.no>] > Sent: Donnerstag, 28. November 2013 13:31 > To: Steve Faulkner > Cc: Schnabel, Stefan; Michael Cooper; David MacDonald; Janina Sajka; > HTML Accessibility Task Force; WCAG WG; > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org<mailto:public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>; > Gregg Vanderheiden; > kirsten@can-adapt.com<mailto:kirsten@can-adapt.com> > Subject: Re: Clarification of WCAG intent and meaning of techniques > [Re: WCAG considering amending F65 to NOT fail missing ALT text if > title or aria-label is present] > > 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 16:14:05 UTC