- 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