WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Software that encourages accessible document creation WASGraphical heading & Alt-text

for

From: Shuttlesworth, Rachel
Date: Jul 15, 2013 2:15PM

Duff says:
"Developing software that encourages authors to learn how to create
accessible documents is profoundly challenging. I do not envy the UI
developers, which is why my contributions are (necessarily) limited to
standing on the sidelines throwing peanut shells."



What are some tools that actually do encourage accessible document
creation?



Rachel

Dr. Rachel S. Thompson
Director, Emerging Technology and Accessibility
Center for Instructional Technology
University of Alabama







On 07/15/13 2:57 PM, "Duff Johnson" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

Bevi,

> Here's the accessibility problem. There is a page that uses graphical
>text
> for the page's main heading, what should be <H1> if it was live text. For
> the visual appearance she wants, the text must be turned into a graphic
>to
> produce the appearance, so she then puts Alt-text on the graphical text.

Funny you should ask this - I got almost (but not quite) the exact same
question earlier today from someone else!

> Questions:
>
> 1) Should it be Alt-text or Actual text on the graphic?

If one may assume that the visual appearance of the text isn't
semantically significant then actual text is indicated.

If the visual appearance is significant (i.e., if there's some sort of
concrete deliverable and relevant message in the typography itself, such
as flames to indicate heat or snow-crystals to indicate cold) then
alternative text would be indicated.

> 2) How can we let the reader know this acts as a <H1>? Because it's
>a
> graphic, it's tagged as a <figure> tag, not an <H1> tag.

Nest the <Figure> tag within an <H1> tag.

> This problem is just one of the many obstacles and software shortcomings
> InDesign and Acrobat users face as they try to convert their layout
>designs
> to either an accessible PDF or an accessible eBook.

These are very very hard questions for software. When does a change to
visual styling "become" semantically significant? Whether the software
helps you solve this problem or not, ultimately all software can do in
such a case would be to bring the question to the attention of a human
author: "what are you trying to say here?"

If the text used in the H1 is also used later on (say, within paragraph
text), it's likely better to use actual text in those cases to preserve
the word-flow when text is repurposed rather than bother the poor user
with alternative text descriptions of the image each time it occurs.

Now, this last point is (largely) derivable from other general advice not
to repeat information without purpose. But it's not going to be obvious
(either way) to many many authors.

There are also - if we are to be honest - cases where it would be
desirable to represent either actual or alternative text, depending. I
believe (I could be wrong) that today's APIs and AT aren't set up to
address such circumstances at this time.

Developing software that encourages authors to learn how to create
accessible documents is profoundly challenging. I do not envy the UI
developers, which is why my contributions are (necessarily) limited to
standing on the sidelines throwing peanut shells.

Duff.