- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 06:46:12 +0200
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>, Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com>, Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, "public-respimg@w3.org" <public-respimg@w3.org>
Laura Carlson, Wed, 5 Sep 2012 07:26:27 -0500:
> Alt should work for a SHORT string text alternative that is read out
> automatically as previously discussed.
>
> Any LONG text alternative would require user choice of consuming and
> the ability for authors to use rich HTML structural elements, e.g.,
> for complex images, charts, graphs, infographics, etc. One of the
> advantages of longdesc is that it enables users to utilize shortcut
> keys that rely on structure to perform functions. Any proposed long
> description element should not provide less functionality. For
> accessibility, structural markup is important because software can use
> structure to perform functions for the user and provide better access
> to content.
Both ideas - <pictcaption> and <desc> - have the problem that until
support is ready, it is hard to avoid that users receive both the short
and the long alternative text.
Else: I see that you don't like <pictcaption> because you think it does
not provide for a way to discern between long and short description.
OK. But note that I did not say that one could not provide "long"
content outside <pictcaption>, the same way that the <figure> element
allows content inside <figcaption> as well as in the "body".
In my message to Kornel [1], I suggested that two content models are
possible with regard to accessible content:
Model (1) - the img like model, where short and long content
has designated child elements. Many think that the
short text should be provided by <img>. But this model
is also where both <pictcaption> and <desc> fits in.
Model (2) - the canvas like model, where <picture> itself has no
role (other than as a presentational container).
Here we can place a <details> or whatever, to create
the experience we want.
But are <desc> really be necessary? As long as the short text is
provided via <img> - by default - then "everything else" would be the
long content. And thus, JAWS should be perfectly able to ignore "the
rest" - until the user eventually asks about it. Not?
Anyway. May be a third model is the best - one which combine of model
(1) and (2) - a model (3);
<picture>
<details>
<summary>
<img alt="Alternative text." src="f" >
</summary>
<ul>
<li>A
<li>small
<li>list
</ul>
</details>
</picture>
Explanation: Let's imagine two parsing modes. A "short accessible
content" mode and a "long accessible content" mode. In the short mode,
when seeing the <picture>, AT looks for the child <img> in order to
establish the short alternative text. We must here imagine that there
is an invisible aria-labelledby which points to the <img> element.
Thus, when parsing <picture> in this mode, the other content is just
ignored. However, at user option, the AT could jump out of <img> and
present the content of <picture>. In the above example, that would be a
details element. But it could be another element to - like figure.
The <details> element could work now, in many/most UAs. But it is quite
difficult to style in such a way that it gets completely hidden inside
<picture>. One could also use aria-describedby to point to the
<details>. I think, in that case, the aria-describedby should point
*from* <picture> to <details>. (And not from <img> to details.)
We should also think about what will happen when neither <img> nor the
<source> files of <picture> will render any image. <details> would work
in that case. Whereas a <desc > would not work unless it had the
@hidden attribute set and unless AT would then render - rather than
'flatten' - tables, lists etc.
[1]
http://www.w3.org/mid/20120906014959201677.b0236edd@xn--mlform-iua.no
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 04:46:50 UTC