[WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Steven Faulkner
If the developers of flickr.com or Photobucket were to implement the
recommendations regarding the omission of the alt attribute within the
current HTML 5 draft what are the potential effects upon the accessibility
of the sites for users of assistive technology such as screen readers?

Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5 -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/articles/altinhtml5.html


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Brad Pollard
  If the developers of flickr.com or Photobucket were to implement the 
 recommendations regarding the omission of the alt attribute within the 
 current HTML 5 draft what are the potential effects upon the accessibility of 
 the sites for users of assistive technology such as screen readers? 
  Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5 - 
 http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/articles/altinhtml5.html

Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of appropriateness 
for sites like flickr (as it currently stands) but flickr should be doing more 
to encourage their contributors to write a bit more of a story about their 
images - the extra information would be useful to not only the visually 
impaired. 

The inclusion of the alt attribute as a requirement has improved developer 
awareness of accessibility - we all work with images.

The alt attribute as a requirement has played, and should continue to play, an 
important role in accessibility. 

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread lisa herrod
On 30/08/2007, Brad Pollard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   If the developers of flickr.com or Photobucket were to implement the
 recommendations regarding the omission of the alt attribute within the
lines: current HTML 5 draft what are the potential effects upon the
accessibility
 of the sites for users of assistive technology such as screen readers?
   Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5 -
 http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/articles/altinhtml5.html

 Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of
 appropriateness for sites like flickr (as it currently stands) but flickr
 should be doing more to encourage their contributors to write a bit more of
 a story about their images - the extra information would be useful to not
 only the visually impaired.



As a default, surely programmes like Flickr and Photobucket can define
a null alt ()  for images?

I'm really disappointed the HTML 5 spec is moving in this direction.
It seems like the only real benefit here is that it might make
validation a little easier on sloppy code.

Lisa


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Alastair Campbell
Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility guidelines?

What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
version) does?

-Alastair


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] Lisa Kerrigan/StateDevPolicy/DSD is out of the office.

2007-08-30 Thread lisa . kerrigan

I will be out of the office starting  30/08/2007 and will not return until
03/09/2007.

For content requests, contact Matt Myers (9651 9128)

For other web-related issues contact Mick Doherty (9651 9426)  or Ming Ma
(965 - 19435)

Regards


**
Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development, 
Government of Victoria, Victoria, Australia.  

This e-mail and any attachments may contain privileged and confidential
information.   If you are not the intended recipient, you may not distribute
reproduce this e-mail or the attachments.   If you have received this message
in error, please notify us by return e-mail.
**




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Patrick Lauke
 Alastair Campbell

 Does the HTML working group have to take into account 
 accessibility guidelines?
 
 What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
 version) does?

I don't think HTML5 is expected to be rolled out until 5 years or so. In that 
sense, WCAG 1 would probably not apply anymore, and because of WCAG 2's tech 
agnostic approach in the normative document it wouldn't be a problem (it would 
only require a new techniques document for HTML5).

P

Patrick H. Lauke
Web Editor / University of Salford
http://www.salford.ac.uk

Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread XStandard
Brad wrote:
 Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of
 appropriateness for sites like flickr
Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of people is 
never appropriate.

Sites like flickr have tools that let photo contributors upload photos in 
batches for convenience. As often happens, convenience for one group of people 
causes inconvenience for another group of people.

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com

 Original Message 
From: Brad Pollard
Date: 2007-08-30 6:28 AM
  If the developers of flickr.com or Photobucket were to implement the 
 recommendations regarding the omission of the alt attribute within the 
 current HTML 5 draft what are the potential effects upon the accessibility 
 of the sites for users of assistive technology such as screen readers? 
  Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5 - 
 http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/articles/altinhtml5.html
 
 Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of 
 appropriateness for sites like flickr (as it currently stands) but flickr 
 should be doing more to encourage their contributors to write a bit more of a 
 story about their images - the extra information would be useful to not only 
 the visually impaired. 
 
 The inclusion of the alt attribute as a requirement has improved developer 
 awareness of accessibility - we all work with images.
 
 The alt attribute as a requirement has played, and should continue to play, 
 an important role in accessibility. 
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***
 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Steven Faulkner
From Laura Carlson:
The HTML WG charter does say:

The HTML Working Group will cooperate with the Web Accessibility
Initiative to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility
requirements. Coordination with WAI will be primarily conducted
through the Protocol and Formats Working Group, but direct
coordination with other WAI groups, such as Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines Working Group and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
Working Group, will also be done when appropriate.
http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#wai



On 30/08/2007, Alastair Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility 
 guidelines?

 What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
 version) does?

 -Alastair


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***





-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html

-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread James Jeffery
I can understand what the WG are saying, making it optional isn't going to
dent accessibility
because good coders will use the alt attribute regardless.

In this world there is going to be sloppy coders who dont follow rules and
positive conventions.

Flickr and Photobucket should provide an alternative method to replace the
alt attribute, but
they are sites that are controlled by the users, just like myspace, so
making sure everyone
follows their guidelines is going to be very difficult.

I think the WG made the right move. No alt tag is better then an empty one.

On 8/30/07, Steven Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 From Laura Carlson:
 The HTML WG charter does say:

 The HTML Working Group will cooperate with the Web Accessibility
 Initiative to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility
 requirements. Coordination with WAI will be primarily conducted
 through the Protocol and Formats Working Group, but direct
 coordination with other WAI groups, such as Web Content Accessibility
 Guidelines Working Group and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
 Working Group, will also be done when appropriate.
 http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#wai



 On 30/08/2007, Alastair Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility
 guidelines?
 
  What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
  version) does?
 
  -Alastair
 
 
  ***
  List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
  Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***
 
 



 --
 with regards

 Steve Faulkner
 Technical Director - TPG Europe
 Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

 www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
 Web Accessibility Toolbar -
 http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html

 --
 with regards

 Steve Faulkner
 Technical Director - TPG Europe
 Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

 www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
 Web Accessibility Toolbar -
 http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread James Jeffery
Also to lessen the confusion, whilst sites like Flickr are marking up their
HTML with
HTML 4.01 they should continue to follow the rules and provide alt
attributes.

:)

On 8/30/07, James Jeffery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I can understand what the WG are saying, making it optional isn't going to
 dent accessibility
 because good coders will use the alt attribute regardless.

 In this world there is going to be sloppy coders who dont follow rules and
 positive conventions.

 Flickr and Photobucket should provide an alternative method to replace the
 alt attribute, but
 they are sites that are controlled by the users, just like myspace, so
 making sure everyone
 follows their guidelines is going to be very difficult.

 I think the WG made the right move. No alt tag is better then an empty
 one.

 On 8/30/07, Steven Faulkner  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  From Laura Carlson:
  The HTML WG charter does say:
 
  The HTML Working Group will cooperate with the Web Accessibility
  Initiative to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility
  requirements. Coordination with WAI will be primarily conducted
  through the Protocol and Formats Working Group, but direct
  coordination with other WAI groups, such as Web Content Accessibility
  Guidelines Working Group and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
  Working Group, will also be done when appropriate.
  http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#wai
 
 
 
  On 30/08/2007, Alastair Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]  wrote:
   Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility
  guidelines?
  
   What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
   version) does?
  
   -Alastair
  
  
   ***
   List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
   Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
   Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   ***
  
  
 
 
 
  --
  with regards
 
  Steve Faulkner
  Technical Director - TPG Europe
  Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium
 
  www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
  Web Accessibility Toolbar -
  http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
 
  --
  with regards
 
  Steve Faulkner
  Technical Director - TPG Europe
  Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium
 
  www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
  Web Accessibility Toolbar -
  http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
 
 
  ***
  List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
  Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***
 
 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Lachlan Hunt

Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:

Brad wrote:
Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of 
appropriateness for sites like flickr


Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of
people is never appropriate.


That's technically true and even though sites like Flickr certainly 
should allow users to provide alternate text for their images, the 
question that still remains is that if allowing the alt attribute to be 
omitted when users don't provide any good text isn't the right solution, 
then what is?  What should the spec recommend to use in these cases?


Whatever the solution(s), there are various different scenarios that 
should be addressed.  (Note that in all of these scenarios, the 
authoring tools should allow the author to specify alt text. This is 
just about what to do when the author doesn't.)


What should an authoring tool (like Dreamweaver) insert by default when 
a user adds an image and immediately dismisses the alt text prompt?  (It 
currently omits the attribute unless the user explicitly selects 
empty or types in some text.)


What should wikipedia use by default for images used in articles?  (It 
currently redundantly repeats the image caption in both the alt and 
title attributes)


What should sites like Flickr, Photobucket, Facebook, MySpace, etc. 
generate and insert?


What should forums (e.g. phpBB) or blogs (e.g. Blogger) use?

What should an email application insert when a user emails an image to a 
friend?


--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread XStandard
Lachlan wrote:
 the question that still remains is that if allowing the
 alt attribute to be omitted when users don't provide any
 good text isn't the right solution, then what is?  What
 should the spec recommend to use in these cases?
It is not the role of the spec to explain how, if you don't do things well, how 
you can do them badly. The role of the spec is to state what is the correct 
behavior - that is all.

Lachlan wrote:
 What should an authoring tool (like Dreamweaver) insert
 by default when a user adds an image and immediately
 dismisses the alt text prompt?
As a WYSIWYG editor vendor, I can tell you what we do. We prompt the user to 
identify if the image is Decorative or not. So the user makes the decision. If 
the user says the image is not decorative, they MUST submit an alt text before 
the image can be saved. Here are the details of what we do:
http://xstandard.com/en/documentation/xstandard-dev-guide/accessibility/#markup-images

Lachlan wrote:
 What should wikipedia use by default for images used in articles?
 What should sites like Flickr, Photobucket, Facebook, MySpace,
 etc. generate and insert?
 What should forums (e.g. phpBB) or blogs (e.g. Blogger) use?
 What should an email application insert when a user emails an
 image to a friend?
They should do what XStandard does, as explained above.

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com




 Original Message 
From: Lachlan Hunt
Date: 2007-08-30 10:52 AM
 Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
 Brad wrote:
 Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of 
 appropriateness for sites like flickr

 Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of
 people is never appropriate.
 
 That's technically true and even though sites like Flickr certainly 
 should allow users to provide alternate text for their images, the 
 question that still remains is that if allowing the alt attribute to be 
 omitted when users don't provide any good text isn't the right solution, 
 then what is?  What should the spec recommend to use in these cases?
 
 Whatever the solution(s), there are various different scenarios that 
 should be addressed.  (Note that in all of these scenarios, the 
 authoring tools should allow the author to specify alt text. This is 
 just about what to do when the author doesn't.)
 
 What should an authoring tool (like Dreamweaver) insert by default when 
 a user adds an image and immediately dismisses the alt text prompt?  (It 
 currently omits the attribute unless the user explicitly selects 
 empty or types in some text.)
 
 What should wikipedia use by default for images used in articles?  (It 
 currently redundantly repeats the image caption in both the alt and 
 title attributes)
 
 What should sites like Flickr, Photobucket, Facebook, MySpace, etc. 
 generate and insert?
 
 What should forums (e.g. phpBB) or blogs (e.g. Blogger) use?
 
 What should an email application insert when a user emails an image to a 
 friend?
 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread James Jeffery
The WG are not going to depreciate it, there going to make it an option to
include
it, so sites like Flickr wont need to include them. In HTML 4.01 if you dont
include the alt attribute, as we all know the document will not validate.

Personally i think by default its usage shouldn't change, so whatever
authoring tools, software and web applications are doing right now, should
continue to do the same in HTML 5. So by default they will be included
unless
the developer choses not to.


On 8/30/07, Lachlan Hunt  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
  Brad wrote:
  Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of
  appropriateness for sites like flickr
 
  Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of
  people is never appropriate.

 That's technically true and even though sites like Flickr certainly
 should allow users to provide alternate text for their images, the
 question that still remains is that if allowing the alt attribute to be
 omitted when users don't provide any good text isn't the right solution,
 then what is?  What should the spec recommend to use in these cases?

 Whatever the solution(s), there are various different scenarios that
 should be addressed.  (Note that in all of these scenarios, the
 authoring tools should allow the author to specify alt text. This is
 just about what to do when the author doesn't.)

 What should an authoring tool (like Dreamweaver) insert by default when
 a user adds an image and immediately dismisses the alt text prompt?  (It
 currently omits the attribute unless the user explicitly selects
 empty or types in some text.)

 What should wikipedia use by default for images used in articles?  (It
 currently redundantly repeats the image caption in both the alt and
 title attributes)

 What should sites like Flickr, Photobucket, Facebook, MySpace, etc.
 generate and insert?

 What should forums (e.g . phpBB) or blogs (e.g. Blogger) use?

 What should an email application insert when a user emails an image to a
 friend?

 --
 Lachlan Hunt
 http://lachy.id.au/


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Designer

Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:


Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of people is 
never appropriate.

Sites like flickr have tools that let photo contributors upload photos in 
batches for convenience. As often happens, convenience for one group of people 
causes inconvenience for another group of people.

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com


Let's just keep things in perspective for a moment.

If a user is unfortunate enough to have eyesight which dictates that 
he/she has to use a screenreader, it is unlikey that he/she will get 
much out of flickr anyway. Even with alt tags, reading that he/she is 
'looking' at a picture of 'my cat' or 'my birthday party' would be 
singularly dull, I'd have thought!


Surely, there ARE cases where a purely visual site can NEVER be 
presented 'accessibly' in any eaningful way?



--
Bob

www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Tony Crockford


On 30 Aug 2007, at 17:51, Designer wrote:

ght!

Surely, there ARE cases where a purely visual site can NEVER be  
presented 'accessibly' in any eaningful way?




yes, but you're not thinking big picture enough (excuse the pun)  alt  
attribute text provides more than just explanation for screen reader  
users, they can(are/will be) important for the semantic web -  
machines can't see, but a meaningful alt tag will help machines find  
the image you're looking for.


accessibility isn't just about overcoming human impairments.

;)


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread David Dorward

On 30 Aug 2007, at 17:51, Designer wrote:
If a user is unfortunate enough to have eyesight which dictates  
that he/she has to use a screenreader, it is unlikey that he/she  
will get much out of flickr anyway. Even with alt tags, reading  
that he/she is 'looking' at a picture of 'my cat' or 'my birthday  
party' would be singularly dull, I'd have thought!


On the other hand, if I'm looking at Flickr with images turned off  
because (a) my service provider charges me per megabyte of data that  
I use and (b) my connection is very very slow, then its quite useful  
to be able to tell if a picture is of my car or my birthday party  
before telling my browser to load the thumbnail.


Lots of people seem to be hung up on the idea that alt text is for  
blind people, but there are quite a few other use cases for the  
attribute.


--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread XStandard
Designer wrote:
 Even with alt tags, reading that he/she is 'looking' at a
 picture of 'my cat' or 'my birthday party' would be 
 singularly dull, I'd have thought!
The dullness of the alt text is irrelevant. Some people find photo sites dull 
and that is just as irrelevant to this discussion.

Designer wrote:
Surely, there ARE cases where a purely visual site...
I don't know what is a purely visual site. Can you please provide an example?

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com




 Original Message 
From: Designer
Date: 2007-08-30 12:51 PM
 Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
 
 Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of 
 people is never appropriate.

 Sites like flickr have tools that let photo contributors upload photos 
 in batches for convenience. As often happens, convenience for one 
 group of people causes inconvenience for another group of people.

 Regards,
 -Vlad
 http://xhtml.com
 
 Let's just keep things in perspective for a moment.
 
 If a user is unfortunate enough to have eyesight which dictates that 
 he/she has to use a screenreader, it is unlikey that he/she will get 
 much out of flickr anyway. Even with alt tags, reading that he/she is 
 'looking' at a picture of 'my cat' or 'my birthday party' would be 
 singularly dull, I'd have thought!
 
 Surely, there ARE cases where a purely visual site can NEVER be 
 presented 'accessibly' in any eaningful way?
 
 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5

2007-08-30 Thread Alastair Campbell
Lachlan Huntwrote:
 the question that still remains is that if allowing the alt attribute to be
 omitted when users don't provide any good text isn't the right solution,
 then what is?  What should the spec recommend to use in these cases?

The problem is differentiating between ignorant and intentional lack
of text. At the moment a missing alt is generally an indicator of
ignorance (not knowing or caring to add alternative).
A null alt either means the author knew enough to not want to put an
alternative in (e.g. decorative/spacer image), or it was automatically
put in for them.

 What should an authoring tool (like Dreamweaver) insert by default when
 a user adds an image and immediately dismisses the alt text prompt?  (It
 currently omits the attribute unless the user explicitly selects
 empty or types in some text.)

I think that's been answered from an accessibility point of view:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-AUTOOLS/#check-no-default-alt

-Alastair


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility guidelines?

2007-08-30 Thread Steven Faulkner
alastair campbell wrote:

Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility
guidelines?

What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
version) does?

I asked around and got some answers that may answer your question:

Charles McCathieNevile  wrote:

The answer to the question is that it has to satisfy WAI that its approach
to accessibility is reasonable and practical. As a sometime WAI member I
will be arguing that WAI is unlikely to accept anything that is a step
backwards from alt, and while it is possible to improve it the volume of
existing content and of existing guidance to use it means that it must be
supported even if there is a better approach proposed to replace it in the
future (like the case of img and object...)

Laura Carlson wrote:

The charter does say:
The HTML Working Group will cooperate with the Web Accessibility
Initiative to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility
requirements. Coordination with WAI will be primarily conducted
through the Protocol and Formats Working Group, but direct
coordination with other WAI groups, such as Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines Working Group and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
Working Group, will also be done when appropriate.
http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#wai


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility guidelines?

2007-08-30 Thread Andrew Cunningham
That's the crux with HTML 5. Some aspects of it will take us forward. 
And quite a few aspects will be backwards steps.


The accessibility and internationalization aspects of HTML 5 are going 
to be very interesting to say the least.


Andrew

Steven Faulkner wrote:

alastair campbell wrote:

 Does the HTML working group have to take into account accessibility 
guidelines?


 What I mean is, does it have to make alt mandatory because WCAG (any
 version) does?

I asked around and got some answers that may answer your question:

Charles McCathieNevile  wrote:

The answer to the question is that it has to satisfy WAI that its approach
to accessibility is reasonable and practical. As a sometime WAI member I
will be arguing that WAI is unlikely to accept anything that is a step
backwards from alt, and while it is possible to improve it the volume of
existing content and of existing guidance to use it means that it must be
supported even if there is a better approach proposed to replace it in the
future (like the case of img and object...)

Laura Carlson wrote:

The charter does say:
The HTML Working Group will cooperate with the Web Accessibility
Initiative to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility
requirements. Coordination with WAI will be primarily conducted
through the Protocol and Formats Working Group, but direct
coordination with other WAI groups, such as Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines Working Group and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
Working Group, will also be done when appropriate.
http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#wai


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


--
Andrew Cunningham
Research and Development Coordinator (Vicnet)
State Library of Victoria
328 Swanston Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
Australia

Email: andrewc+AEA-vicnet.net.au
Alt. email: lang.support+AEA-gmail.com

Ph: +613-8664-7430Fax:+613-9639-2175
Mob: 0421-450-816

http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/http://www.vicnet.net.au/
http://www.openroad.net.au/   http://www.mylanguage.gov.au/
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~andrewc/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***