- From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:16:49 +0100
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
apologies to leif for not catching this earlier -- the following is a post which LHS attempted to post to the public-html-a11y emailing list but which was rejected (and which isn't archived in the list archive) ---------- Forwarded Message ----------- Ämne: Re: FIGCAPTION, @alt, and @labelledby: 3 issues Från: "LHS" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> Datum: 09.07.2010 14.11 A problem with the Consensus document is that it only focuses on some sort of simplistic prototype usage of <figure>. It is natural to be wanting to use <figure> like that. But it is not a typical example of the figure 'concept'. E.g. the Consensus doc does not talk about the very likely issue that the figure has both a caption, an img AND some additional text. One does not need to have changed one's mind about the simplistic prototype in order to say what Gregory said. Another thing: why did the Consensus doc not talk about <details>? Can the caption of the details element in a simplified prototype example replace the @alt? I assume that it can't. Because the 'body' of <details> is also supposed to be meaningful no its own. However, that is also the case for the body of <figure>s, in more typical examples than the one in the Consensus doc. I think the Consensus document lacks a requirement: role="img". <figure role="img"> <captionElement> Description </captionElement> <img alt="" src="pict"/> </figure> Gregory's <figure> example on the other hand, should not have role="img". Leif Steven Faulkner on 2010.07.09 10.56: >Hi Gregory, >>ISSUE 1: i have a major objection to equating FIGCAPTION with @alt or aria-labelledby >In the 'WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on Text alternatives in HTML 5' document [1] it was agreed ... > - the <img> is located within a <figure> that has a non-empty <figcaption> >Is what laura has proposed substantially different to the consensus doc or >have you changed your views on it? [1] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5.html regards steve On 8 July 2010 15:27, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote: > aloha, laura! > > three issues arising from a review of the materials you so expertly > compiled at: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jul/0028.html > > ISSUE 1: i have a major objection to equating FIGCAPTION with @alt > or aria-labelledby -- as a content developer, i would like to be able > to use FIGCAPTION as a caption for an image or a collection of > images, in the way that LEGEND functions for FIELDSET > > <figure> > <figcaption>Four Stages of a Butterfly's Life</figcaption> > <img alt="egg" src="bf1.png" longdesc="bf1.html"> > <img alt="larva" src="bf2.png" longdesc="bf2.html"> > <img alt="pupa" src="bf3.png" longdesc="bf3.html"> > <img alt="adult" src="bf4.png" longdesc="bf4.html"> > </figure> > > specifying either @alt or FIGCAPTION be used eliminates this > possibility -- there has been discussion on this topic (associating > multiple images with a single caption that describes the group) > which became bifurcated due to my having initially cross-posted > the emessage to wai-xtech as well as public-html-a11y: > > start: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0142.html > > reply thread 1: > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0143.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0144.html > > reply thread 2: > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0010.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0011.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0012.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0013.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0015.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0016.html > * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-xtech/2010Jun/0019.html > > > ISSUE 2: i support the use of aria-labelledby as a valid substitute for > @alt ONLY if @labelledby is introduced into HTML5 as a "naked" > attribute (that is, without the aria- prefix) -- content providers > cannot count on ARIA support to provide such a fundamental feature > as a terse textual descriptor of an image nor should they -- this is > a case where native solutions MUST be available to content developers > > > ISSUE 3: i support use of aria-describedby as a valid substitute for > LONGDESC if, and ONLY if, @describedby is incorporated into HTML5 > as a "naked" attribute (again, without the aria- prefix) -- content > providers and users cannot count on ARIA support -- NOR SHOULD THEY -- > if a native HTML5 solution is available... therefore, naked > @labelledby and @describedby are the only realistic alternatives to > use of @alt and LONGDESC > > gregory. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Trouble sharpens the vision. In our moments of distress we can see > clearly that what is wrong with this world of ours is the fact that > Misery loves company and seldom gets it. -- P.G. Wodehouse > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Gregory J. Rosmaita, oedipus@hicom.net > Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/ > Oedipus' Online Complex: http://my.opera.com/oedipus/ > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- Original Message ----------- > From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> > To: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org> > Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton > <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> > Sent: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 06:37:07 -0500 > Subject: Re: Add rationale or exclude role="presentation", > aria-labelledby & aria-labelled attributes from alt change proposal? > Help needed. (was Re: ISSUE-31 Change Proposal) > > > On 7/8/10, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > > > > I believe this satisfies the request for updates. I'll update the > > > issue status page. > > > > Okay. Thank you. > > > > Again, it anyone on the accessibility task force can supply text > > to justify role="presentation" and aria-labelled, please, please > > do let me know. > > > > I would love to add it to the task force endorsed proposal: > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010May/0033.html > > > > Kindest Regards, > > Laura > > > > > On Jul 7, 2010, at 7:49 AM, Laura Carlson wrote: > > > > > >> Hello Everyone, > > >> > > >> As you know the HTML WG Chairs asked that rationale be provided for > > >> the aria-labelledby and aria-labelled and role="presentation" options > > >> in the alt "Replace img Guidance for Conformance Checkers" Change > > >> Proposal [1] for HTML Issue 31. > > >> > > >> I asked the accessibility task force for help to supply rationale [2]. > > > >> > > >> To date I have received no response to my inquiry. > > >> > > >> Maciej asked [3] that I exclude the aria-labelledby and aria-labelled > > >> and role="presentation" options, if I did not add rationale. > > >> > > >> I have done so in a new change proposal. This proposal allows <img> > > >> only to be valid with <alt> or <figcaption>. This new offering is at: > > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20100707 > > >> > > >> I did find some bullet points stating advantages for aria-labelledby > > >> in Steve's "HTML5: Techniques for Providing Useful Text Alternatives" > > >> [4]. So I created an additional new change proposal for <img> to be > > >> valid only with <alt> or <figcaption> or aria-labelledby. It is at: > > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20100706 > > >> > > >> Maciej, Sam, and Paul, please add these two new additional change > > >> proposals to the change proposal table for Issue 31 [5]: > > >> > > >> 1. <img> valid only with <alt> or <figcaption> or aria-labelledby > > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20100706 > > >> > > >> 2. <img> valid only with <alt> or <figcaption> > > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20100707 > > >> > > >> I also added Steve's bullet points to the original (accessibility task > > > >> force endorsed) change proposal. [1] > > >> > > >> If anyone can supply text which delineates rationale for and > > >> role="presentation" or labelledby or further/better rationale for > > >> aria-labelledby please, please speak up, I would be delighted to add > > >> it to the original proposal and ImgElement20100706. > > >> > > >> Thank you. > > >> > > >> Best Regards, > > >> Laura > > >> > > >> [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126 > > >> [2] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0213.html > > >> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0588.html > > >> [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/html-alt-techniques/ > > >> [5] http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-031 > > >> > > >> Related References asking for task force help on Issue 31 change > proposal: > > >> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jan/0310.html > > >> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Feb/0008.html > > >> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Mar/0007.html > > >> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Apr/0134.html > > >> > > >> On 6/24/10, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> Hello everyone, > > >>> > > >>> -public-html > > >>> +public-html-a11y > > >>> > > >>> Maciej has asked [1] for added rationale in the alt change proposal > > >>> for role="presentation", aria-labelledby & aria-labelled attributes. > > >>> > > >>> Or else he suggests excluding these three options from the proposal. > > >>> > > >>> He has said what we currently have is factual description of what > > >>> these mechanisms are and what they do. But we have no reason for why > > >>> the spec should be allowed to omit alt when one of these is present. > > >>> > > >>> So should I remove these options? Or does anyone have suggest text to > > > >>> add to the proposal to justify these options better? > > >>> > > >>> The current text in the change proposal states [2]: > > >>> > > >>> QUOTE > > >>> > > >>> Added Options which Address Accessibility > > >>> > > >>> The language of WCAG2 allows a text alternative to be expressed in > > >>> other ways besides the alt attribute. Three cases in particular > > >>> distinguish syntax for cases, which yield more accessible content. > > >>> > > >>> role="presentation" Attribute > > >>> > > >>> role="presentation" programmatically conveys to assistive technology > > >>> that an image is presentational and not of interest. > > >>> > > >>> aria-labelledby and aria-labelled Attributes > > >>> > > >>> When the natural concise text alternative is available elsewhere on a > > > >>> page the aria-labelledby and aria-labelled attributes can be an > > >>> accessible alternative for an image as it programmatically conveys > > >>> meaning to assistive technology. For example: > > >>> > > >>> <h2 id="bronze">Bronze Medal</h2> > > >>> <!-- Some page content --> > > >>> <img src="bronzemedal.png" aria-labelledby="bronze"> > > >>> > > >>> UNQUOTE > > >>> > > >>> All guidance and suggestions greatly appreciated. Thank you. > > >>> > > >>> Best Regards, > > >>> Laura > > >>> > > >>> [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0588.html > > >>> [2] > > >>> > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126#Added_Options_which_Address_Accessibility > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On 6/23/10, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> On Jun 23, 2010, at 11:30 AM, Laura Carlson wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi Sam, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I think/hope that I have now addressed the concerns that you have > > >>>>> raised. > > >>>>> I: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> 1. Added rationale for all changes. > > >>>>> 2. Removed the reference to the paragraph-section-heading loophole, > as > > >>>>> Ian indeed removed it from the spec per as requested in Bug 9217. > > >>>>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9217 > > >>>>> I just hope it doesn't reappear in the spec. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> In addition, I updated all three of my current proposals for Issue > 31. > > >>>>> So far, all together I have three proposals and possibly a fourth. > > >>>>> They are: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> 1. Replace img Guidance for Conformance Checkers. January 26, 2010. > > > >>>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126 > > >>>>> In this one I tried to incorporate WAI CG's advice. > > >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2009/06/Text-Alternatives-in-HTML5 > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I still don't see any rationale given for the following three alt > > >>>> exemptions > > >>>> added by your change proposal: > > >>>> > > >>>> * aria-labelledby attribute present (non-empty only) > > >>>> * aria-label attribute is present (non-empty only) > > >>>> * role attribute is present and has a value of "presentation". > > >>>> > > >>>> The "Rationale" section has a factual description of what these > > >>>> mechanisms > > >>>> are and what they do, but as far as I can tell, no reason is given > for > > >>>> why > > >>>> it should be allowed to omit alt when one of these is present. > Please > > >>>> either > > >>>> add rationale for these changes or adjust the scope of the Change > > >>>> Proposal > > >>>> to exclude them. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> There are also rationale sections relating to a "CAPTCHA Loophole" > and a > > >>>> "WebCam Loophole" which do not appear to relate to any actual > changes > > >>>> proposed in the Details section. That's not as critical a problem as > > > >>>> changes > > >>>> without rationale, but it's something you may wish to address. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Regards, > > >>>> Maciej > > >>> > > >>> On 6/23/10, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > > >>>> This change proposal needs to be updated both in order to provide a > > >>>> rationale for each change requested, and to reflect differences > from the > > >>>> current draft of the document. > > >>>> > > >>>> As a concrete example, the proposal provides no rationale for > removing > > >>>> the paragraph-section-heading "loophole" save for a pointer to a bug > > > >>>> report, and the resolution of that bug report indicates that that > > >>>> condition was removed. Looking at the current text, this condition > is > > >>>> indeed no longer present: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#guidance-for-conformance-checkers > > >>>> > > >>>> Other specific examples: There is rationale given for allowing > > >>>> role="presentation", aria-label or aria-labeledby as exemptions for > alt. > > >>>> > > >>>> - Sam Ruby > > >>>> > > >>>> On 02/11/2010 03:03 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > >>>>> (+public-html) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hi Laura, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've recorded this as an additional Change Proposal for ISSUE-31: > > >>>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-031 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> (I've suggested previously that you and Ian should work together to > > > >>>>> identify any changes here that are uncontroversial, so they can be > > >>>>> directly applied to the HTML5 draft; I hope the two of you find > some > > >>>>> time to make progress on that.) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards, > > >>>>> Maciej > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Jan 28, 2010, at 2:18 AM, Laura Carlson wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hello Everyone, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I have drafted a Change Proposal for HTML ISSUE-31. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Summary: > > >>>>>> The current guidance for conformance checkers for Section 4.8.2.1 > the > > >>>>>> img element is unclear and does not implement WAI CG's advice on > the > > >>>>>> validation of short text alternatives. This change proposal > replaces > > >>>>>> the current guidance with clear guidance that lists all required > short > > >>>>>> text alternative options that exist to be considered valid. It > enables > > >>>>>> automatic validators to programmatically detect the presence or > > >>>>>> absence of text alternatives. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Full proposal is at: > > >>>>>> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ChangeProposals/ImgElement20090126 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Ideas for improvement are most welcome. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>> Laura > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Laura L. Carlson > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Laura L. Carlson > ------- End of Original Message ------- > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG Europe Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org Web Accessibility Toolbar - http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html ------- End of Forwarded Message -------
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2010 20:17:17 UTC