- From: Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 20:11:07 -0400
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
The book in question[1] doesn't make any claims of being accessible; it's not in the accessible section of their catalogue. The book was also published back in 2016, so calling it out for not using a technology that had far less support at the time isn't really making a fair argument. I don't know of any guidance for epub or the web that says images of math are the ideal. It's done of necessity. If images of math are ubiquitous in new production a few years out, now that MathML rendering is becoming ubiquitous, then we'll have a problem. [1] https://www.vitalsource.com/products/projective-geometry-elisabetta-fortuna-roberto-v9783319428246 Matt -----Original Message----- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2023 6:51 PM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Mathematics as Images On 20/07/2023 23:35, Steve Green wrote: [...] > Based on those definitions, I would say there is a very strong case that formulae are text and that images of formulae violate SC 1.4.5 Images of Text. Note though the start of 1.4.5 "If the technologies being used can achieve the visual presentation". As said, while MathML has been getting better, with support coming directly into browsers (rather than requiring some plugin solution), I'm not sure it's as pervasively supported yet to be able to fail formulae presented as images. Also - and I'll admit I'm not too hot on MathML ... are there actually defined rules for how MathML itself is supposed to reflow, at a technical level? P -- Patrick H. Lauke https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux https://mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 21 July 2023 00:11:14 UTC