Re: why ALT text alone doesn't suffice for many blind/VI users

> Is there anyone else who cares to make the case that graphical text in
> navigation elements is NOT a significant barrier to many folks with low
> vision?

I haven't caught this entire discussion, so excuse me if I'm missing the
point. 

From a Web developer's and an accessibility evaluator's perspective,
<em>requiring</em> that all text be presented as text, instead of an
image of text, is quite unrealistic. Idealistic, yes, but "designers
won't accept it and won't do it" if it's not a reasonable request. While
I certainly agree that where ever possible text should be used instead
of images of text, there are many many instances where actual text can
not be used: logos, trademarks, propriatary text.... as a number of you
have mentioned. If we want to convince developers not to use images of
text, ever, there needs to be much better reasoning. Dictating just
doesn't cut it with this crowd.

With regard to navigation images, images of text can aid accessibility.
Most older screen readers won't read down through a set of text
navigation links to the left of a page, without reading them in amoungst
the text that appears in the content to the right. Our solution, create
image navigation buttons down the left and provide a text alternative,
usually a set of text links at the bottom of the page with a bypass link
to them. If the navigation links to the left are text, that would
violate WCAG1 5.3 and 10.3, if tables have been used to place them
there. CSS positioned DIVs sort of fixes this problem but CSS
positioning is not consistent enough across browsers to require that
developers use CSS/DIVs for this purpose.

I might also argue that these navigation text-image links could include
blank ALT text. In practice we include the ALT text anyway to avoid
arguments from accessibility advocates that follow the guidelines to a
T, rather than by reasoning or functionality. The first of these
navigation links might read "text navigation at bottom", thereby
reducing the redundancy of having to listen to a barage of nav links at
the top of every page. 

By the same token, a navigation bar may appear horizontally across the
top (or bottom) of a page with ALT text ommitted in favour of a set of
text links immediately below it. I have not heard a good arguement that
would justify including ALT text for map areas or buttons in an instance
like this, although I'm sure many here would say, as 1.1 states, include
text for ALL non text elements (period). Reasoning---Functionality!
Well, in this case the text links below are the text alternative. Why
include ALT text? Again, why not use a single ALT text for the first map
area or button that points the user to an accessible text version some
where else on the page. No functionality is lost, and accessibility is
improved by reducing redundancy.

The guideline should state "Don't use images of text for navigation
purposes without including an actual text alternative."

Received on Monday, 23 October 2000 19:41:37 UTC