W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

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

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:30:58 +0100
Message-ID: <55687cf80908170330p5ba646c9m760d5f9ba5d5e4df@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
hi maciej,

in regards to the the img-in-a-link example

what jaws does for example is look for content in the link, if it does not
find any it reports the href value.

this is the same whether the image is alt="" or role="presenatation"

i do not think its a good idea to start having seperate meaning for alt=""
and role="presentation" it probably confusing enough as it is.

2009/8/17 Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>

> Consolidating replies:
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:02 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
> hi all,
>> i think  the following examples should raise a conformance error.
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png" role="presentation"></a>
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png"></a>
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png" alt=""></a>
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png" role="presentation"
>> aria-labelledby="this"></a> <span id="this">delete</span>
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png" alt="" aria-labelledby="this"></a> <span
>> id="this">delete</span>
> I believe HTML5 as currently drafted would make all of these conformance
> errors, because it requires non-empty alt when an image is the sole content
> of a link: <
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#a-link-or-button-containing-nothing-but-the-image>.
> HTML5 makes non-empty alt mandatory in this case, and the requirement is
> machine-checkable.
> I think the follwoing should not
>> <a href="#"><img src="delete.png"  aria-labelledby="this"></a> <span
>> id="this">delete</span>
> I believe this is not currently conforming, but probably will be once ARIA
> is integrated.
> On Aug 17, 2009, at 3:15 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>  hi henri, maciej
>> >Wouldn't it be simpler to change a handful of browsers to hide <img
>> alt=""> from MSAA than to get zillions of authors to add role=presentation
>> where they >already have alt=""?
>> >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".
>> I don't think the intent is to get all legacy content using
>> role="presentation" it is to promote the use of a standard generic mechansim
>> for elements that should not be exposed via the accessibility API. the use
>> on <img> being one example.
> OK, thanks for clarifying. In light of this, and Ben's feedback, I think it
> might be better not to have the warning. I think alt="" serves the purpose
> fine
>> i think that it would be appropriate to add a user agent requirement that
>> an img with empty alt should not be mapped to accessibility APIs as this is
>> what it how it works in AT.
> Given Ben's feedback, it sounds like it may be better to map these images
> to accessibility APIs, and have a requirement that AT should not expose them
> unless it detects an error where it would be better to flag the existence of
> the image in some way. Thinking about the img-in-a-link example from Ben and
> how we could make it work in Safari+VoiceOver, I think we'd want to let
> VoiceOver flag the image in that case.
> as far as the warning goes i can live with it not occuring.
> All right. Curious if anyone else has input.
> 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 -
Received on Monday, 17 August 2009 10:31:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:54 UTC