WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: PDF accessibility


From: Geof Collis
Date: Feb 12, 2010 11:45AM

Hi Bevi

Thanks, I'm with you!!


At 12:33 PM 2/12/2010, you wrote:
>Geoff asked:
>< So what is the yardstick for whether or not an image is decorative or
>an artifact? >
>Deciding that is like hitting a moving target!
>For me, if the graphic helps identify the publication to someone who is
>sighted, then it should have a descriptive Alt tag on it for screen reader
>Example: If I was in a conversation with another sighted person, I might
>refer to this brochure as "the one with the blue brick wall and the
>graduation cap on the cover," and that visual description might help my
>colleague locate the brochure from a stack on a crowded desk.
>If I can imagine that that scenario with a sighted person could take place,
>then this graphic should be described to screen reader users, too.
>In my 508 classes, I have my students create a hypothetical group of people
>talking about their publication. 2 people are sighted, one is blind, and one
>is handicapped. Sighted people use a lot of visual shortcuts, such as
>calling this brochure "the blue brochure" rather than "the red one," or "the
>one with the woman on the cover" rather than the one with the man.
>But when we use that language (or fail to Alt-tag significant identifying
>graphics), we leave out our blind colleagues. They can't see if it's the
>blue brochure unless we've indentified the cover graphic as such.
>The photo of the blue brick wall might be decorative, but it's also carrying
>significant visual information that is used to identify the publication.
>To be an artifact, for me the graphic has to be a totally useless piece of
>frou-frou, visual eye-candy, a purely decorative graphic and not useful for
>identifying the publication or a section in it.
>As a graphic designer, my minimalist design style doesn't use much
>frou-frou, so if I put a photo into the document, I want you to see it,
>whether you're blind or sighted. Therefore my work isn't going to have as
>many artifacts in it as someone else's work.
>. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>. . .
>Bevi Chagnon | <EMAIL REMOVED> | www.PubCom.com
>Consultants + Trainers + Designers | for print, web, marketing, Acrobat, &
>PublishingDC Group Co-Moderator |
>. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>. .