- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 07:32:53 -0600
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org, oedipus@hicom.net
- Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Hello everyone, On 12/3/10, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm willing to bet there isn't likely a great >> discrepency. Is there? > > Yes there is a big difference in scope and action. > >> I will take a look later today. On thing I would like to point out about Gregory's change proposal [1]. Its narrow scope assumes the answer to one of the questions [3] and the outcome of Issue 31. It assumes that Ian's change proposal [2] will prevail and the possible values of the text alternatives be defined in the HTML5 spec. Both Issue HTML-ISSUE-31 and HTML-ISSUE-122 concern text alternative values examples in the <img> element design space. Both issues overlap. Issue-122's scope was expanded to apply to all WG deliverables. A couple other text alternative problems that are narrow in scope but are in the same <img> element design space as Issue 31: * CAPTCHA Bug 9216 on HTML5 [4] and CAPTCHA Bug 9169 on Techniques for providing useful text alternatives [5]. * Webcam Bug 9215 on HTML5 [6] and Webcam Bug 9174 on Techniques for providing useful text alternatives [7]. Both the HTML5 Spec and the Techniques for providing useful text alternatives are in direct conflict. I haven't raised these as individual issues in the Tracker yet as the decision for Issue 31 may possibly resolve them. Best Regards, Laura [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/purely_decorative_images [2] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElementSurveyConformaceChoices#3._Text_Alternative_Examples_Question:_.22Where.2Fwho_will_define_requirements_on_the_possible_values_of_text_alternatives_examples.3F.22 [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jul/0050.html [4] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9216 [5] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9169 [6] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9215 [7] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9174 On 12/3/10, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: >> I'm willing to bet there isn't likely a great >> discrepency. Is there? > > Yes there is a big difference in scope and action. > >> I will take a look later today. > > Thank you. > > Best Regards, > Laura > > On 12/3/10, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: >> Dear Laura: >> >> Well, it seems we've had too many cooks in the kitchen. I'm very, very >> sorry. As Gregory notes in his message, we did assign him an action on >> this at TPAC. Regretably, that action, along with several others from >> TPAC, were logged in the WG tracker and not the TF tracker. I guess we >> missed moving it back to TF. And, I clearly missed your email. >> >> So, we probably don't need both change proposals before the WG. While >> I've yet to read yours, I'm willing to bet there isn't likely a great >> discrepency. Is there? I will take a look later today. >> >> My suggestion is that we put our heads together and decide which one to >> pull--assuming the differences are, in fact, cosmetic. >> >> Janina >> >> Laura Carlson writes: >>> Hello Everyone, >>> >>> > As determined at the Task Force teleconference on 2 December, we will >>> > forward the below referenced change proposal to the HTML WG as our >>> > recommendation this weekend unless a serious, substantive objection is >>> > raised on list meantime. >>> > >>> > If you have such an objection, please reply on list to this email. >>> > >>> > Today's minutes,where thic source of action is decided, can be found >>> > at: http://www.w3.org/2010/12/02-html-a11y-minutes.html >>> >>> Paul sent his email to this task force expanding scope and calling for >>> Counter-Proposals for Issue 122 on November 5. In that message the >>> HTML Chairs set a deadline to "submit counter-proposals, alternate >>> proposals and revised proposals for this issue by November 27, with >>> the understanding that it applies to all HTML WG publications." [1] >>> Today is December 2. Paul, Maciej, and Sam was this a real deadline? >>> >>> I drafted and submitted a change proposal [2] for Issue 122. This task >>> force and the WG was alerted to that November 7. [3] From the minutes >>> it doesn't seem that it was considered at the accessibility >>> teleconference today. Janina, was it? >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Laura >>> >>> [1] >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Nov/0071.html >>> [2] >>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/TextAlternativesIssue122 >>> [3] >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Nov/0096.html >>> >>> On 12/2/10, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: >>> > As determined at the Task Force teleconference on 2 December, we will >>> > forward the below referenced change proposal to the HTML WG as our >>> > recommendation this weekend unless a serious, substantive objection is >>> > raised on list meantime. >>> > >>> > >>> > If you have such an objection, please reply on list to this email. >>> > >>> > Today's minutes,where thic source of action is decided, can be found >>> > at: >>> > http://www.w3.org/2010/12/02-html-a11y-minutes.html >>> > >>> > Janina Sajka, Co-Facilitator >>> > HTML-A11Y Task Force >>> > >>> > Gregory J. Rosmaita writes: >>> >> aloha! >>> >> >>> >> as documented in: >>> >> >>> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/purely_decorative_images >>> >> >>> >> in fulfillment of HTML WG Action 195, assigned to me at TPAC 2010: >>> >> >>> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/195 >>> >> >>> >> which seeks to close HTML WG Issue 122: >>> >> >>> >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/122 >>> >> >>> >> here is the change proposal providing replacement text for section >>> >> 4.8.1.1.7 of HTML5 >>> >> >>> >> --- BEGIN CHANGE PROPOSAL --- >>> >> >>> >> Text Describing Purely Decorative Images in HTML5 >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Summary >>> >> >>> >> This change proposal addresses ISSUE-122 Lady of Shallott as example >>> >> of >>> >> purely decorative image. >>> >> >>> >> This change proposal was composed in fulfillment of HTML WG >>> >> ACTION-195: >>> >> propose replacement example for lady of shallot example of purely >>> >> decorative use of image with code example of one of the use cases >>> >> provided in prose introducing the example >>> >> >>> >> Rationale >>> >> >>> >> Advice about providing alt text for "purely decorative images, and >>> >> the >>> >> definition thereof, should be contained in the HTML5: Techniques for >>> >> providing useful text alternatives and the Web Content Accessibility >>> >> Guidelines, version 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). >>> >> >>> >> Details >>> >> >>> >> Currently, HTML5 section 4.8.1.1.7 states: >>> >> >>> >> 4.8.1.1.7 A purely decorative image that doesn't add any >>> >> information >>> >> >>> >> ISSUE-31 (alt-conformance-requirements) blocks progress to Last >>> >> Call >>> >> >>> >> In general, if an image is decorative but isn't especially >>> >> page-specific, for example an image that forms part of a >>> >> site-wide >>> >> design scheme, the image should be specified in the site's CSS, >>> >> not >>> >> in the markup of the document. >>> >> >>> >> However, a decorative image that isn't discussed by the >>> >> surrounding >>> >> text but still has some relevance can be included in a page using >>> >> the img element. Such images are decorative, but still form part >>> >> of >>> >> the content. In these cases, the alt attribute must be present >>> >> but >>> >> its value must be the empty string. >>> >> >>> >> Examples where the image is purely decorative despite being >>> >> relevant >>> >> would include things like a photo of the Black Rock City >>> >> landscape >>> >> in a blog post about an event at Burning Man, or an image of a >>> >> painting inspired by a poem, on a page reciting that poem. The >>> >> following snippet shows an example of the latter case (only the >>> >> first >>> >> verse is included in this snippet): >>> >> >>> >> <h1>The Lady of Shalott</h1> >>> >> <p><img src="shalott.jpeg" alt=""></p> >>> >> <p>On either side the river lie<br> >>> >> Long fields of barley and of rye,<br> >>> >> That clothe the wold and meet the sky;<br> >>> >> And through the field the road run by<br> >>> >> To many-tower'd Camelot;<br> >>> >> And up and down the people go,<br> >>> >> Gazing where the lilies blow<br> >>> >> Round an island there below,<br> >>> >> The island of Shalott.</p> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Replace With >>> >> >>> >> 4.8.1.1.7 A purely decorative image that doesn't add any information >>> >> >>> >> If an image is decorative but isn't especially page-specific -- for >>> >> example, an image that forms part of a site-wide design scheme -- the >>> >> image should be specified in the site's or document's CSS, not in the >>> >> markup of the document. >>> >> >>> >> Exceptions to this rule, in cases where CSS cannot be used to display >>> >> an entirely decorative image, are covered by the HTML5: Techniques >>> >> for >>> >> providing useful text alternatives. [HTML ALT TECHS] Authors are also >>> >> encouraged to consult the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 >>> >> for >>> >> more detailed information and acceptable techniques. [WCAG 2.0] >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Impact >>> >> >>> >> Positive Effects >>> >> >>> >> * Provides a single reference for "A purely decorative image that >>> >> doesn't add any information" by providing the correct usage >>> >> guide >>> >> for "purely decorative images": define them using CSS; >>> >> >>> >> * Keeps such information in a single reference for developers and >>> >> authors; >>> >> >>> >> Negative Effects >>> >> >>> >> * none, since advice and guidance on providing appropriate alt >>> >> text >>> >> is already contained in HTML5: Techniques for providing useful >>> >> text alternatives [HTML ALT TECHS]; >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Conformance Classes Changes >>> >> >>> >> none >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Risks >>> >> >>> >> none >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> References >>> >> >>> >> * HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives >>> >> http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ >>> >> >>> >> * Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, version 2.0 (WCAG 2.0) >>> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag20 >>> >> >>> >> --- END CHANGE PROPOSAL --- >>> >> >>> >> OPEN QUESTIONS: >>> >> >>> >> 1. should the first paragraph of the replacement text contain a >>> >> warning >>> >> that it is not possible to annotate background images when using CSS? >>> >> >>> >> 2. [your question(s) here] >>> >> >>> >> gregory. >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of >>> >> focus. -- Mark Twain >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> Gregory J. Rosmaita: oedipus@hicom.net >>> >> Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/ >>> >> Oedipus' Online Complex: http://my.opera.com/oedipus >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> > >>> > -- >>> > >>> > Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 >>> > sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net >>> > >>> > Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org >>> > Linux Foundation http://a11y.org >>> > >>> > Chair, Protocols & Formats >>> > Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf >>> > World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Laura L. Carlson >> >> -- >> >> Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 >> sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net >> >> Chair, Open Accessibility janina@a11y.org >> Linux Foundation http://a11y.org >> >> Chair, Protocols & Formats >> Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf >> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) >> >> > > > -- > Laura L. Carlson > -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2010 13:33:27 UTC