- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:02:55 +0100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>
Hi Jonas > I.e. is the difference between the W3C and WHATWG versions here just a > difference in authoring requirements? Or also a difference in > implementations requirements? authoring requirements only -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 18 June 2013 11:57, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Steve Faulkner > <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Am 07.06.2013 um 23:13 schrieb Ian Hickson: > >> > >> >> <img src="..." title="image"> > >> > > >> > If you have a caption from the user (as opposed to replacement text), > >> then > >> > this is a perfectly valid option. It's as valid as the <figure> case, > and > >> > means the same thing. > >> > > >> > [...] > >> > >> > > > > the above statement is bad advice: > > > > browsers map title to the accessible name in accessibility APIs when alt > is > > absent, so > > > > in the following cases: > > > > <img src="..." title="poot"> > > > > <img src="..." alt="poot"> > > > > the accessible name is 'poot'. > > > > it is only when there is an accessible name already provided that title > is > > used as an accessible description: > > > > <img src="..." alt="poot" title="description of poot"> > > > > Also note that as per the W3C HTML spec, use of the title without an alt > is > > non conforming[1] as it does not represent a caption for an image and as > > you point out is hidden from a variety of users due to a long and > > consistent history of poor implementation. > > Steve, > > Does the spec still require that if an implementation encounters an > image with a title but without an alt to present that to users with > and without AT in a useful way? > > I.e. is the difference between the W3C and WHATWG versions here just a > difference in authoring requirements? Or also a difference in > implementations requirements? > > / Jonas >
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 11:04:05 UTC