- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 20:33:20 +0100
- To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Cc: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
hi ben, Firefox for example provides a flag (IsProbablyForLayout [1]) indicating whether a table is likely to be layout or not based on a range of factors, so yes it could well be worthwhile taking into account a number of properties of the image apart from the attribute under discussion to produce a similar indicator. [1] http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/ident?i=IsProbablyForLayout On 4 August 2012 20:13, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >>>I doubt a user agent would factor the presence of an attribute such as >>>@relaxed into its decision to indicate or not indicate the presence of >>>a particular image without a provided text alternative. In particular, >>>I doubt user agents which provide configuration for indicating or not >>>indicating such images (such as VoiceOver which allows users to ask it >>>to announce all images or only images "with descriptions") would >>>distinguish <img> and <img relaxed> as distinct categories in their >>>configuration UI. >> >> I don't presume to make such judgements without first having defined a >> proposed mechanism and sought feedback from end users and the >> accessibility engineers implementing such a mechanism in user agents. > > Well, it's up to you if you feel they're likely enough to use the flag > to spend your cycles and theirs to see if they want the flag mentioned > in your mapping guide :) > > You might want to ask them at the same time if there's additional > information that could help them make decisions about whether to alert > a user to an image's presence, such as URL, intrinsic (as opposed to > rendered) size, transparency, color count, and repetition statistics, > that they might want surfaced. > > IAccessibleImage (from IA2) doesn't have much in the way of relevant fields: > > http://accessibility.linuxfoundation.org/a11yspecs/ia2/docs/html/interface_i_accessible_image-members.html > > But maybe AT in practice just pulls out information from the DOM and > CSSOM via references in the IA2 object. Or maybe their algorithms for > deciding whether to alert users to images or not aren't all that > sophisticated yet. Or maybe they'd prefer browsers did the work. Don't > see anything about this grepping the NVDA codebase for example. > > -- > Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Saturday, 4 August 2012 19:34:29 UTC