- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:48:56 -0500
- To: "John M Slatin" <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, "Roberto Scano \(IWA/HWG\)" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
An addendum, thanks again to Jim Allan: IE displays text in the body of the <object> element if ActiveX controls are toggled off. But if ActiveX contrtols are toggled off, IE doesn't display the image. Thanks to Jim Allan. Thanks also to Jim Thatcher for testing this, and for putting the test file up on his site at http://jimthatcher.com/test/object.htm John -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John M Slatin Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 3:54 pm To: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG); w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: RE: [Techs] Short text alternatives for object element Roberto wrote: ...it's logical that if object is not shown, alternative mudt be displayed. John: Actually, I think the text in the <object> body should be spoken by screen readers even when images are turned on. Otherwise it's not *alternative* content-- it's inaccessible (to everone!) if the browser can render the content specified in the data attribute. Screen readers report alt and title attributes for the <img> element when Show pictures is turned ON, and that's what should happen. And it works even when the <img> is inside an anchor, and that's what should happen. So there are two very different concepts of "alternative" content at work. In the case of the <object> element, "alternative content" is shown when the *browser* has a "disability" (i.e., is missing a plug-in or other device required to *render* some type of content. But for accessibility purposes alternative content serves *people* who are unable to *perceive* certaint types of content even when that content is impeccably rendered. Even if IE did what it's supposed to do with the <object>, we'd still need to reassess whether it's appropriate to recommend putting text alternatives in the body of the <object> element as an accessibility solution. John ----- Messaggio originale ----- >Da: "John M Slatin"<john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu> >Inviato: 16/08/04 22.19.21 >A: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >Oggetto: [Techs] Short text alternatives for object element >Item 10.5 in HTML Techniques for WCAG 2.0 [1] recommends putting short >text alternatives in the body of the <object> element. This technique >works for Firefox and Opera but not for Internet Explorer 6. > >I don't claim elegance for the attached page, but it does pass the >validator. a .jpg file is specified in the opening tag of the <object> >element, and a text alternative is provided in the body of the <object> >element as described in the ttechnique. >JAWS 5.0 does not read the text inside the body of the <object> element. >I thought this might be because I had images turned on in the browser, >so I turned them off (Tools|Options|Advanced|Multimedia|Show pictures - >OFF). Not only did this not solve the problem-- JAWS still didn't read >the text alternative-- but it revealed another one: IE continued to >display the image. > >I asked Jim Allan to check this for me and he said that both Opera and >Firefox display the embedded text when images are turned off, but IE >doesn't. > >At the very least, this should be identified as a User Agent issue; it >probably affects 10.6 and 10.7 as well, though I haven't checked to see >if they behave differently. > >[1] >http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20040730/#object_shortde s >cription > > >"Good design is accessible design." >John Slatin, Ph.D. >Director, Accessibility Institute >University of Texas at Austin >FAC 248C >1 University Station G9600 >Austin, TX 78712 >ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 >email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu >web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/ ><http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/> > > > > > > > [Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
Received on Monday, 16 August 2004 21:48:58 UTC