- From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 22:03:30 +0100
- To: "Adrian Roselli" <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Tue, 04 Sep 2012 21:47:15 +0100, Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com> wrote: > My point was more about @alt being solely for non-sighted users. I felt > that starting off with that premise could lead to conclusions based on a > faulty base. Ah, sorry. Of course instead of "sighted/non-sighted" I should have said "when UAs display the image/when UAs don't display the image or expose alternative available to the screen reader" Pedantism turned out to be useful, because when the issue is phrased this way I now see the problem: the image may be displayed and at the same time a screen reader may want to access alternative content. This makes handling of interactive content in fallback tricky, as focus required for the screen reader (needing to activate link in <picture>) would differ from focus required for GUI users with images displayed (never focusing <picture> content). The easy workaround for that may be to treat <picture> fallback/alt similarly to <button> content, i.e. just forbid focusable/interactive elements. Do any UAs allow users to access <a> in rendered <object>? -- regards, Kornel
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 21:04:00 UTC