- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 03:52:58 +0100
- To: "jackalmage@gmail.com" <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTML WG LIST <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Steve Faulkner, Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:40:15 +0000: > This is a proposal Tab sent to the WHATWG mailing list > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-March/030766.html > 2. @alt is fine [...] but some images are complex [...] > 3. To fix this, @longdesc was added, [...] [which] has several > problems, [...] realize that the value [...] should be a link Many developers DO get it's a link, but misuse it to link to "long images" instead of long descriptions. > Second, [...] Since the long description is not > presented at all in all major visual user-agents, a breakage can go a > long time before being detected. [...] If it had the same level of support as @alt, we would have come a long way: it should be rendered to a sighted user when the he/she disables image display. Then authors would've been able to check how it works *for those which (most) need it*. > 5. The <canvas> element's [...] The problems with @longdesc > described in #3 are not present in <canvas> - the descendants are > clearly alternative content, and travel inline with the element, > making them immune to linkrot. [...] The only way to eliminate linkrot in the fallback of a canvas or object is to not use anchor or area elements inside the fallback! In fact, there are at least 3 important similarities between @longdesc and fallback: 1) One can have unhelpful URLs inside @longdesc just as one can have unhelpful fallback inside <canvas>/<object>/<video>. 2) One can forget to update @longdesc just as one can easily change @src/@data, without updating the fallback. Btw: Upon disabling images, what major browser does then display object's fallback? 3) On can do <img longdesc=data:text/html,Lorem%20Ipsum src=img> (that is: one can use a data URI) and thereby embed the long description DIRECTLY inside the img element, just as one can embed fallback directly inside the object/video/canvas element. > [canvas dependence on scripting make it] inaccessible for visual users without > javascript, or for user-agents like feed readers that don't run script. [...] What's the feed "survivability" for this: > <canvas src="complex-chart.png"> > <table> > -data that the chart represents- > </table> > </canvas> Versus this: <img longdesc=URL src=img > ? > I've discussed this privately already, and one of the objections to > this proposal was that @longdesc allows the user-agent to delay > loading the alternative until the user actively requests it, as it's > not always ideal to drop a large structured alternative into the > middle of content (similar to how sighted users can just skip over a > complex chart, returning to it later when they have more time or > attention). I don't believe this is a valid objection - there is > nothing requiring a screen-reader to automatically present the > alternative content to the user. UAs must already have ways to delay > showing in-band information until requested, so as to correctly > represent the <details> element, for example. The same mechanism can > be used for <canvas>; while I'm not in any place to recommend UI for > screen-readers, it may even make sense to present <canvas> and > <details> in a unified fashion. > > Thoughts on the problem or the proposed solution presented here? I think the idea to make <canvas> become what <img> - or rather: <object> - should have been, is a good idea. Because <object> doesn't work so well, for many reasons: Even many AT/screenreaders do not support fallback of the object element very well - perhaps the AT support is on pair with AT's @longdesc support - or is it worse? To use ARIA to fix the problem with <object data=image>...</object> works, but only to a degree - only for very simple markup, last I checked. For instance, I doubt that it works for tables as children. But the comparison with <details> seems odd to me: For <details>, users first usually get a "summary" in the <summary> element, which they they can use when deciding about looking at "the details". There is no similar thing in <canvas>. (At least as long as we literally keep for example the @aria-label out the picture.) I am curious to hear what the ARIA experts think about your idea. In particular: which @role - if any - should a canvas element that is embedding a table in the fallback have? Should it get "table role"? (This question is relevant to <object> too, of course.) It can't have role="img", because ARIA says that that AT should not make the children of elements of role=img accessible. What I don't agree with you about, is if you see <canvas> as the "homo erectus" in a kind of evolutionary history which began with <img>, via <object>. Perhaps <canvas> *could* become the preferred element for "complicated images in need of complicate markup as fallback". But unless you also staff <canvas> with its own link attribute (aka @longdesc) and teach authors how to use <canvas> for images which only needs 'simple textual equivalents' (aka @alt), then <img> serve its own need. Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2011 02:53:35 UTC