@charlesstaats I think this is being CC'ed to the texinfo list
(somewhere?) but as I'm seeing it on the github issue the original email
context is stripped, but feel free to forward.
> . However, it looks like it was added in 2021,
yes
> What happens if graphicx is older with an unknown alt= passed?
it would error but you could add code to the latex preamble to
conditionally make it a defined (and no-op) or you could make all such
accessibility additions conditional on `\DocumentMetadata` being defined
(that was also added in 2021)
> In case it is possible to use \DocumentMetadata, which should be the
format of the lang? Some examples on the internet look like BCP 47
yes or omit it and it defaults to `en`
> Not sure that there is a use [for artifact] in Texinfo to LaTeX
conversion.
possibly not, it is for marking essentially decorative images which you
want to drop entirely from the accessible view.
> It seems to be actualtext=, not actual=. We could use a file like
image.txt that we use in Info output, for example for that. It is not
clear, however, how to specify it. Is it an issue if there are end of
line in it? Blank lines? The manual does not show any example.
In the end it needs to resolve to a plain text string that is a PDF
property value so ends of lines are OK, but are spaces as is normal in TeX.
The PDF standard suggests this should be for small sections of text
typically replacing a custom symbol (or a textual image) not for paragraph
length
> It is not clear to me why style=nextline is incompatible with tagging. Is
it really important, or should it be fixed someday?
We'll fix that. Most of `enumitem` keys are emulated by the new built-in
accessible list code however that one is currently document as `todo`
so I added a quick workaround in this document, but just assume it works.
> The noparboxtagging stuff seems obscure to me, but I can add it if there
is some explanation,
Please ignore that, it will go, we were just forcing in some markup to
check that we could generate a PDF/UA-2 accessible file from the texinfo
source. Now we know it's possible we can fix up the markup.
> Regarding `\usepackage{unicode-math`}, I do not have a clear idea whether
it is a good idea to use that instead of amsmath.
It's just a lot easier to generate MathML accessible mathematics (which is
required to be in Unicode) if you use a Unicode engine and Unicode math
fonts in the original. However it is possible to use legacy tex math fonts
and map to unicode so it's not essential, but in general accessibility is
better from luatex than pdftex.
----
so in short if you ignore the experimental ad-hoc commands added to fix up
the test document so it worked today, what would be good would be
* an option or configuration or whatever that allowed you to choose
accessibility options for latex, so
```
\DocumentMetadata{
lang=<document-language-from-texinfo>,
pdfstandard=ua-2,
tagging=on
}
```
there are other options that could be added there but keeping things
simple....
* then use `unicode-math` instead of `amsmath` and pass the alt text
argument on graphics through to `\includegraphics`
it might be nice to have some way of saying to use that argument as
actualtext instead of alt but if that doesn't really fit the texinfo input
syntax I don't think that's essential. If alt is OK for the html
translation it's probably OK for pdf too.
* set the pdf metadata dc:title based on information in the texinfo source.
On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 2:31 PM Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 11:07:25AM -0600, Charles Staats wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Currently, `texi2any --latex` appears to discard any alt text tag, see
> >
> https://github.com/latex3/tagging-project/issues/1491#issuecomment-5061006949
> .
> > Would it be possible to change this?
> >
> > Ideally, there would be some sort of flag like `--accessible` or
> > `--latex-tagging` that could be passed to the texi2any script that would
> > cause certain changes to the TeX and pdf output, such as the following:
>
> I do not think that a command-line should be used for that. Maybe a
> customization variable.
>
> > * Forward any alt text to the `\includegraphics` commands.
>
> This seems to be relevant independently of the remaining. However, it
> looks like it was added in 2021, according to
> https://ctan.tetaneutral.net/macros/latex/required/graphics/grfguide.pdf
>
> What happends if graphicx is older with an unknown alt= passed?
>
> > * Insert a `\DocumentMetadata` command (with appropriate settings) at the
> > beginning of the document.
>
> Which LaTeX version support \DocumentMetadata? What happens if the
> version used does not?
>
> In case it is possible to use \DocumentMetadata, which should be the
> format of the lang? Some examples on the internet look like BCP 47, but
> it is not so clear.
>
> > * (For pdf output) compile with lualatex instead of pdflatex.
>
> texi2any does not compile the LaTeX file, just produces it.
>
> > * Ideally, we would also have "actual" and "artifact" tags as well. If I
> > understand correctly, the "actual=<stuff>" tag indicates to screenreaders
> > that the image should be treated as if it were the text "<stuff>";
>
> It seems to be actualtext=, not actual=. We could use a file like
> image.txt that we use in Info output, for example for that. It is not
> clear, however, how to specify it. Is it an issue if there are end of
> line in it? Blank lines? The manual does not show any example.
>
> Also it seems to be quite recent, end of 2024, similarly, what happens
> with older graphicx with an unknown actualtext= passed?
>
> > the
> > "artifact" tag tells the screenreader to ignore the image altogether
> (used,
> > e.g., for logos).
>
> Not sure that there is a use in Texinfo to LaTeX conversion.
>
> > There may be other changes needed, as discussed in the issue linked
> above.
> > (Note: Some of these may be better dealt with on the TeX side rather than
> > the texinfo side.)
>
> I think that \hypersetup{pdftitle={}} could be added. It looks like a
> relevant addition in the default case.
>
> It is not clear to me why style=nextline is incompatible with tagging.
> Is it really important, or should it be fixed someday?
>
> The noparboxtagging stuff seems obscure to me, but I can add it if there
> is some explanation, and also it is not clear to me if
> \AssignTaggingSocketPlug
> and \tagpdfparaOff are backward compatible enough.
>
> Regarding \usepackage{unicode-math}, I do not have a clear idea whether
> it is a good idea to use that instead of amsmath. It seems that the
> \mathbf and similar commands should be changed, but it is not so clear
> either. Also it seems to require some specific fonts. Maybe there
> could be some customization option to generate LaTeX for an engine or
> the other.
>
> --
> Pat
>
