Re: Request to Reconsider Alt Guidance Location

Steve Faulkner, Sun, 26 Feb 2012 09:44:14 +0000:

>> Not sure what the TF thought they were voting for, but this implies to
>> me there may be new normative requirements.
> 
> none of the statements you have cited , from my reading, imply that
> new normative requirements are to be minted

No new normative requirements. But also no old normative requirements, 
as far as I can see. [But see below.] As result, there will be nil - 
zero - normative requirements - apart from WCAG [which already 
applies]: No normative alt authoring requirements in HTML5 proper, none 
in the alt techniques document - and none anywhere else.

We have a focus on whether conformance checkers should be allowed to 
drop conformance checking of the @alt usage when the META Generator 
element occurs in the document. But we won't have @alt text validation 
if there is not going to be any normative authoring requirements.

See below.

> Any suggestions you have on how to modify the CP text
> to make that clearer would be appreciated.

My advice is to drop this CP and instead use the energy to focus on the 
remaining IMG related issues we have, including @longdesc.

But if you insist on continuing with it, then update the CP with the 
following info:

* Explain the precise fate of the @ALT techniques document:
  - Its [new] title
  - A list of the formats it will cover [Word, ODF, SVG, HTML, etc]
  - Who is to be responsible for it - which WG
  - Whether it is to be considered one of the many WCAG _techniques_.
    That is to say: Will it be a single technique document. Or will 
    the document's many sections become independent technique documents.
  - How it differs or not differs from other WCAG technique documents
    and whether it will replace any existing WCAG technique documents
    and whether it will be authored in a way that differs from other
    WCAG technique documents
  - if @longdesc gets included in HTML5, will its usage be described
    in this document?
  - other relevant things

* Explain consequences for - and relationship to - the HTML5 spec
  - The [possible] consequences for HTML5's section on
    'Guidance for conformance checkers' [1]
  - whether you'll reuse *anything* of what your want to delete
    from HTML5 or whether you will start from scratch
  - how will you [not] be bound by the HTMLwg's [old] @alt 
    related decisions
  - whether this CP will put to rest the current IMG related
    issues, such as the Generator exception and the @title usage issue.


  This may be seen as an extension to previous point:
* Describe the consequences for conformance checking of @alt.
  - will there be any @alt checking in HTML5-conformances checkers
    or will such things be moved to a specialized checker.

    If there will be any kind of HTML5-conformance @alt checking, then:
  - what kind of checks HTML5-conformance checkers be required/asked 
    to perform? E.g. will it be exactly like in HTMl4?  Or will 
    there be no requirement to check, but instead an encouragement
    to check - some things? 
  - on which basis HTML5-conformance checkers will perform such
    checking - where are the requirement to be fulfilled described.
  - Currently, some @alt mistakes constitute Errors. It seems like
    this [possible] new approach could only allow trigger Warnings.
    Please explain.

PS: I also encourage you to have much shorter and more precise Summary. 
Currently, I had to read as far as to the Details section, in order to 
start to get an overview of what it suggests.

[1] 
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/the-img-element#guidance-for-conformance-checkers
-- 
Leif H Silli

Received on Sunday, 26 February 2012 16:13:52 UTC