Re: Discussion of alt for CSS images

Urrrg... ! You are so right James... that did it... we have to get Gez to
add that...

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 Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 11:59 AM, james.nurthen@oracle.com <
james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:

> Have you made sure to start JAWS before you start Firefox?
>
>
> On Mar 28, 2015, at 8:28 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike
>
> JAWS16 read the aria-label and role="img" fine in Chrome in the example
> but IE and FF are not reading them.
>
> I've actually stopped using JAWS and FF, because it doesn't seem to go
> into Browser mode.
> I've tried all the fixes here
> http://juicystudio.com/article/handling-erratic-behaviour-at.php
>
> So if someone has their JAWS and FF running well together perhaps they can
> confirm my results.
>
> 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 Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:24 PM, Mike Elledge <melledge@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> This is very interesting, David. I know you asked that others check the
>> JAWS interactions, but are accessibility problems most often with JAWS and
>> IE together? I had assumed (perhaps unfairly) the culprit was most often IE
>> alone.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2015, at 4:53 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *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 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *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 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
>>>
>>> <oracle_sig_logo.gif> <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
>>> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle
>>> is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
>>> environment
>>>
>>
>>
>