WCAG-ISSUE-21 (DavidMacD): We should have a conversation about decoration vs. pure decoration [HTML & ARIA Techniques TF]

WCAG-ISSUE-21 (DavidMacD): We should have a conversation about decoration vs. pure decoration  [HTML & ARIA Techniques TF]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/track/issues/21

Raised by: David MacDonald
On product: HTML & ARIA Techniques TF

We should have a conversation about decoration vs. pure decoration http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#puredecdef   "serving only an aesthetic purpose, providing no information, and having no functionality"  I think we need to provide more guidance on that. A lot of web sites are providing photos which enhance the visual experience, but it is iffy if the information is useful to those who are blind. Like a CSS image of a pharmacist on a pharmacy web site, or a picture of pills on the pill department.

The HTML5 text alternatives doc from Steve talks about this type of decorative image. 
http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/#sec5

I want to get a sense of how to interpret "no information and no functionality"
If we want to interpret it as Steve has, then we will need to update our understanding document to explain "no information, and no functionality" in the context they are being used...

http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/text-equiv-all.html
We would have to amend the paragraph that starts "Sometimes there is non-text content that really is not meant to be seen or understood by the user." to incorporate some of the language Steve uses.

Received on Monday, 26 May 2014 15:37:56 UTC