Re: feedback requested on WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on Text alternatives in HTML 5 document

On Aug 17, 2009, at 1:36 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote:

> hi maciej,
>
> >(7) The Consensus Resolutions document suggests that alt="" (empty  
> alt) without role="presentation" on the same element should trigger  
> a non-fatal validator >warning that recommends adding  
> role="presentation".
> This suggestion is based on the desire to promote the use of  
> role="presentation" as a generic method of indicating an element  
> should not be mapped to an accessibility API, as implemented by a  
> number of browsers [2] . the use of alt="" does not do this (e.g in  
> MSAA role="graphic"), but has been used by a number of AT to hide  
> images from the user by not announcing the images presence.

Would it be appropriate, in light of this, to add a user agent  
requirement that an img with empty alt should not be mapped to  
accessibility APIs at all? It seems like that would do the job a lot  
faster than migrating content to role="presentation".

Regards,
Maciej

>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria/#presentation
> [2] http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/aria-tests/ARIA-SafariaOperaIEFF.html
>
> 2009/8/15 Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
>
> On Aug 15, 2009, at 3:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2009, at 3:18 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2009, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>
> I don't understand what is confusing about my request, what I asked  
> for
> is feedback on the content of the 'Consensus Resolutions on Text
> alternatives in HTML 5' document.
>
> If you can see your way to providing that, it would be helpful.
>
> In order to review any technical proposal, I have to understand the
> problem it is solving. I don't understand the problem that this  
> proposal
> is solving.
>
> From studying both documents, I believe the material differences  
> between Steve's document and the current spec text are:
>
> (1) The Consensus Resolutions document includes ARIA techniques  
> (@aria-labeledby and @role="presentation") for labeling an image,  
> the spec currently does not.
> (2) The Consensus Resolutions document does allow <figure> <legend>  
> like the spec, but it does not allow @title or a heading for an  
> image-only section to describe an image. The current spec allows  
> this, only in the case where the contents of the image are unknown.
> (3) The Consensus Resolutions document does not have the "private  
> communication" exception.
> (4) The Consensus Resolutions document includes @aria-describedby as  
> an choice for optional long descriptions.
> (5) The spec has much more extensive advice about what should go in  
> the alt attribute than the Consensus Resolutions, including common  
> particular cases such as images as link content, or CAPTCHAs.
> (6) The Consensus Resolutions proposal recommends an explicit  
> reference from HTML5 to WCAG 2.0.
>
> I missed an important difference the first time around:
>
> (7) The Consensus Resolutions document suggests that alt="" (empty  
> alt) without role="presentation" on the same element should trigger  
> a non-fatal validator warning that recommends adding  
> role="presentation".
>
>
>
>
> Steve & Ian, do you think I have described the differences  
> accurately? Steve, could you clarify which of those differences are  
> important, and give the motivation? Ian, could you comment on which  
> of these differences would imply a worthwhile change to the spec,  
> perhaps after Steve explains the motivation?
>
> My personal impression is that the current spec satisfies all of the  
> "Principles underlying the advice below", other than the ARIA  
> techniques (which are pending integration of ARIA) and the explicit  
> reference to WCAG 2.0.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> 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