- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:58:46 -0600
- To: Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, "W3C WAI Protocols & Formats" <public-pfwg@w3.org>, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reE=iHaF1WXLufD1sF-bYjVnpODAXEP7jVN1HQg7q8g=UQ@mail.gmail.com>
I really dont want to have the longdesc debate again, do you? It is a W3C recommendation. It is part of HTML5. It satisfies the requirements for this particular problem. They should use it. On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Chaals McCathie Nevile < chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Dec 2015 12:54:21 +0300, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote: > > >> 1.) The diagram in this document should have a longdesc. >>> >> >> -1. This is why we can't have nice things. >> > > Well-described images, and descriptions people could readily find, and > avoid, at will, would indeed be nice. > > Even better accessibility would be even nicer, but it seems we can't have > that soon :( > > If possible, the diagram itself should also be created using accessible >>> SVG markup. >>> >> >> Is your recommendation intention really SVG+longdesc? That's how this >> reads. >> > > That's what was proposed at the meeting. In particular, VoiceOver users > generally can't get the benefit of a longdesc, but it is possible to make > some types of SVG somewhat accessible to them, and the image here seems to > be a good candidate (if Safari follows SVG links and Firefox implements > tabindex). Meanwhile, users of other screenreaders can get a longdesc, but > except for blink-based browsers it's pretty hard to make something like SVG > usefully accessible to them. > > Instead of an overly prescriptive proposal of one possible solution ("You >> must use @longdesc, and ideally SVG."), this should be phrased, ~"The >> diagram in the document should be made accessible." How they choose to do >> that is irrelevant. Neither @longdesc nor SVG is a requirement for >> accessibility. >> > > That's correct in principle, and I would be happy if we made that > statement. But we'll then get a question on how to do so in practice, at > which point it seems we come to inherent accessibility, which means SVG, > but also doesn't work very well for most people so we need a fallback, > which is a description. For obvious reasons people should be able to > identify and skip over the description the third or fourth time they read > the document. You are right that longdesc isn't the only way to achieve > that, and in many cases it *should* be used in conjunction with a > description that's part of the normal page content. > > You should also include some examples of how to make both vector and >> bitmap images accessible. You're welcome to use the options I've compiled >> here. Note: 2 of the 5 examples do use SVG. >> > > I think it would be more useful to include some examples of how to make > the particular image under discussion more accessible. I'd be happy to look > for a bit of time to try and do this. I'd be equally happy if several > people had a go, so we could compare concrete examples and try to find all > the problems and good points in each. > > cheers > > -- > Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex > chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com > > -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Friday, 11 December 2015 17:59:15 UTC