Re: Discussion of alt for CSS images

Thanks Jonathan

I'll add these when I return to Canada.

Cheers,

David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

www.Can-Adapt.com



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
wrote:

>  David, thank you for putting together this test set.  I have some
> important additions to share – I apologize for getting to this late.
> Initially I was thinking about this from a low vision perspective and not a
> screen reader perspective – so the items below are tested without AT but
> with accessibility features in the platform and browser.
>
>
> Additional tests with David's test set: Firefox 35 - Windows high
> contrast started before FF loads
>
> CSS Background Images disappear
>
> CSS Content images remain.
>   Firefox 35 - Allow pages to choose their own colors
>
> CSS Background Images disappear
>
> CSS Content images remain.
>   IE 11 - Ignore Colors on web pages
>
> CSS Background Images disappear
>
> CSS Content images remain.
>
>
> IE 11 - Show Images Off; Expand Alt text for Images ON
>
> CSS Background Images remain
>
> CSS Content images remain.
>
>
> New Test:
>
> <img src="meaningfulimage.jpg" alt="Meaningful image" />
>
> <img src="meaningfulimage.jpg" aria-label="Meaningful image" />
>
>
> IE 11 - Show Images Off; Expand Alt text for Images ON
>
> Alt text displayed
>
> aria-label not displayed
>
>
> Firefox 35 - Permission Default Image 2 (turn off images)
>
> Alt text displayed
>
> aria-label not displayed
>
>
> IE 11 and Firefox 35 – broken image (incorrect url)
>
> Alt text displayed
>
> aria-label not displayed
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
>
>
>
> 703-637-8957 (o)
> Follow us: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/#%21/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter
> <http://twitter.com/#%21/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog
> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter <http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
>
>
>
> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
> *Sent:* Friday, March 27, 2015 4:53 PM
> *To:* James Nurthen; Andrew Kirkpatrick
>
> *Cc:* WCAG
> *Subject:* Re: Discussion of alt for CSS images
>
>
>
> As per my action items, here are testing results for CSS background and
> CSS inline images.
>
> http://davidmacd.com/blog/css-background-images.html
>
>
>   Cheers,
>
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *CanAdapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
>
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:19 PM, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
> not Jonathan but I think we are talking about things like
>
> #myid:before
> {
> content:url('http://www.w3.org/2008/site/images/logo-w3c-screen-lg');
> }
>
> Regards,
> James
>
>
>
> On 3/27/2015 9:01 AM, David MacDonald wrote:
>
>  Hi Jonathan
>
> I'm just throwing up some examples now... When you speak of "inline CSS
> images", are you speaking about a regular <img ...> tag which is positioned
> with CSS, or a CSS background image which has been positioned inline using
> CSS?
>
>
>   Cheers,
>
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *CanAdapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
>
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jonathan Avila <
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
>
> Ø  Yes that is what I was referring to. I think this is a problem
> especially for low vision users - perhaps we have done a disservice to
> those users in this instance.....
>
> I would agree.  So to be clear, we are talking about two issues that
> impact users with low vision.
>
>
>
> 1.    Use of CSS background  images that convey meaning but have
> programmatic names via properties such as aria-label
>
> 2.    Use of inline CSS images that convey meaning and have programmatic
> names via properties such as aria-label.
>
>
>
> While these two issues may sounds the same – CSS images are supposed to be
> presentational and those background images are rightly removed in high
> contrast mode and when color are often turned off by the browser to improve
> reading contrast for users with low vision.  Inline images are considered
> non-presentational and thus are still displayed in these modes.
>
>
>
> So, IMO the CSS background issue is a more egregious issue while the
> aria-label on inline images is lesser because at least the inline image is
> visually available.
>
>
>
> Without any requirement for the user agent to display accessibility names
> for inline images it is problematic and raises accessibility support issues.
>
>
>
> Use of presentation images with only programmatic indicators seems to meet
> like a failure – but WCAG doesn’t seem to address this under 1.1.1 or
> 1.3.1.  Seems like an oversight.  For example, WCAG WG thought wisely in SC
> 1.4.1 to require a visual indicator of color in addition to a programmatic
> one – but this didn’t carry over to CSS background images as 1.1.1 and
> 1.3.1 only require programmatic indicators and not visual.  I think the
> assumption is that everyone can interpret visual information or else they
> will be using assistive technology or a browser that has some accessibility
> feature that compensates.  While that is generally true – background images
> seem like a safe thing to remove as they are only for background purpose.
> The problem is that people are using CSS background images to convey
> meaning because use of inline images have performance challenges.
>
>
>
> Just my two cents.
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
> --
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
>
> Phone 703.637.8957
> Follow us: Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/#%21/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter
> <http://twitter.com/#%21/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog
> <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter <http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
>
>
>
> *From:* Katie Haritos-Shea [mailto:ryladog@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 25, 2015 9:45 PM
> *To:* David MacDonald
> *Cc:* WCAG
> *Subject:* Re: Discussion of alt for CSS images
>
>
>
> David,
>
> Yes that is what I was referring to. I think this is a problem especially
> for low vision users - perhaps we have done a disservice to those users in
> this instance.....
>
> * katie *
>
> Katie Haritos-Shea @ GMAIL
>
> On Mar 25, 2015 4:05 PM, "David MacDonald" <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi Katie
>
> Do you mean if for example if someone has images turned off, or if a file
> reference was wrong, the alt would appear in the space where the image is,
> but the aria-label won't?
>
> If so, I've heard a few discussions of that on the HTML5 group. I think
> most would say that it is not a cross browser behaviour, and that some
> browsers show the alt, and others don't show the alt, and that browsers
> could show the aria-label if they wanted to.
>
> The precedence which was set when we removed the requirement for alt on
> images if there is another means of reporting ACCNAME to the API, (which I
> was not particularly in favour of), sets a precedent that this behaviour of
> populating the empty image space with a visible alt, is not considered
> necessary for conformance by our Committee, and therefore not necessary for
> conformance here.
>
>
>   Cheers,
>
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *CanAdapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
>
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <
> ryladog@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David,
>
>
>
> The other issue was what is visually apparent to users who do not use AT
> (concerning CSS images), but are not getting the images. There is not alt
> text. Any ideas on that issue?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ** katie **
>
>
>
> *Katie Haritos-Shea*
> *Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)*
>
>
>
> *Cell: 703-371-5545 <703-371-5545> **|* *ryladog@gmail.com*
> <ryladog@gmail.com> *|* *Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile*
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*|* *Office: 703-371-5545
> <703-371-5545>*
>
>
>
> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 25, 2015 12:34 PM
> *To:* WCAG
> *Subject:* Discussion of alt for CSS images
>
>
>
> Reading through the minutes I see there was a discussion about CSS in
> images... it appears one concern is that it is not announced to screen
> readers as an image. Although I generally discourage the use or CSS images,
> if someone has to do them I suggest using role="image"
>
> <div role="image" class="myPicture" aria-label="My dog fluffy looking
> happy">
>
> This should announce to a screen reader that it is an image and the
> alternate text...
>
>
>   Cheers,
>
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *CanAdapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
>
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Marc Johlic <johlic@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> Minutes for the March 24, 2015 meeting:
> http://www.w3.org/2015/03/24-wai-wcag-minutes.html
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Marc
>
>
> Marc Johlic | Accessibility Consultant - Web, Mobile, & Multimedia | IBM
> *Accessibility* | IBM Research
>
>
>
>
> From:        Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
> To:        WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Date:        03/20/2015 09:30 AM
> Subject:        WCAG Agenda March 24 2015
>  ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> The WCAG WG will be meeting on Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 11AM Eastern US
>
> (Length: up to 90 minutes)
>
> Bridge: +1.617.761.6200  (US) Passcode: 9224#
>
> IRC: irc.w3.org<http://irc.w3.org>  port: 6665 channel #wai-wcag
>
> Scribe list:https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
>
> Survey/Agenda
>
> 1) WCAG F2F @ TPAC Sapporo, and comment responses etc
> New survey https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/24thMarch2015/
>
> 2) Techniques work
>
> 3) Charter update
>
> 4) Reminder about outstanding actions
>
> --
> Joshue O Connor/Andrew Kirkpatrick
> WCAG working group co-chairs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards, James
>
> [image: Oracle] <http://www.oracle.com>
> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918
> <+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com
> Oracle Corporate Architecture
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065
> [image: Green Oracle] <http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is
> committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
> environment
>
>
>