- From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 20:28:18 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 03:57:00 +0100, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@målform.no> wrote: >> <picture> >> <img alt="text alternative"> >> </picture> > > So, just to be 100%: Based on how JAWS + Firefox 13+ handle the canvas > element[1], then AT users would experience the picture element the > following way:: > > 1. the picture element would itself not be announced (unless > authors added a role (e.g. role=img) to the picture element) and > 2. in case there were no <img> element in the fallback, then AT users > would not be told that there was any image here. > > So, they would not experience it. I think it's fine that UAs that don't support <picture> simply read the content. After all it's an alternative, not a meta-description of the markup. As long as the alternative content is useful, it shouldn't be important that originally it has been implemented using an image in a visual medium. e.g. <picture src=yellow-triangle.png>Warning!</picture> Alt is tricky. is fine if it's read as: "Warning! Alt is tricky" rather than something noisy like: "*Picture* Warning! *Text* Alt is tricky" > (Strictly speaking, and despite the canvas behavior, the AT *could* > probably announce the picture — e.g. it could say ‘Picture!’. But > if so, if there could perhaps be confusion e.g. if it found <img> > element inside the picture.) UAs that do support <picture> natively can be smart enough to avoid announcing fallback <img> redundantly (e.g. either don't announce <picture> when it has <img> in it, or announce <picture> and then just read following <img>s as if they were plain text of its alt attribute). -- regards, Kornel
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 19:28:43 UTC