WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: quick question on alt text

for

From: Graham Armfield
Date: Dec 9, 2019 4:26AM

Earlier this year I did some research around screen reader support for
<figure> and <figcaption>. Sadly the news wasn't great, but you can read
what I found in a blog post:
https://www.hassellinclusion.com/blog/figure-figcaption-extended-alternate-text-screen-readers/

Regards
Graham Armfield

coolfields.co.uk <http://www.coolfields.co.uk/>;
M:07905 590026
T: 01483 856613
@coolfields <https://twitter.com/coolfields>


On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 at 00:37, Jonathan C. Cohn < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> I 'believe there is an exception.I was recently reading that figure
> captions are not supporthat consistently, so alt text is required even when
> there is a figcaption.
> Jonathan Cohn
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Dec 6, 2019, at 3:11 PM, glen walker < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >
> > Since the image is not interactive (not contained in a link or button),
> as
> > Jared said, it can be considered decorative.
> >
> > If you want to save three characters when typing, you can have "alt" by
> > itself rather than having alt="". The following two examples are treated
> > the same.
> >
> > <img src="foo.jpg" alt>
> > <img src="foo.jpg" alt="">
> >
> > See the first example in
> >
> https://www.w3.org/TR/html53/semantics-embedded-content.html#ref-for-elementdef-img%E2%91%A8%E2%91%A6
> > It mentions alt="" or alt by itself.
> >
> > If the image were in a link, my preference is to hide the image and put
> the
> > label on the link itself. For example, the following will say "important
> > stuff, graphic, link".
> >
> > <a href="...">
> > <img src="foo.jpg" alt="important stuff">
> > </a>
> >
> > The user most likely doesn't care that you implemented a link as an image
> > and just wants to know what the link is for. It's a minor change but I
> > usually code it as:
> >
> > <a href="..." aria-label ="important stuff" >
> > <img src="foo.jpg" alt>
> > </a>
> >
> > Now when you navigate to the link, you just hear "important stuff, link".
> > You don't hear "graphic". It's a minor difference but I like the
> > "cleanness" of just hearing that it's a link and ignoring that it happens
> > to be implemented as an image.
> >
> > However, one could argue that a low vision user might be able to see some
> > kind of blob where the link is and guess that it's an image and try to
> > navigate by images, in which case my example above would skip that image.
> > So it's a trade off. Either example satisfies WCAG.
> >
> > The W3C has a decision tree on deciding if an image is decorative. See
> > https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/decision-tree/
> > There's also further info on decorative, informative, and other types of
> > images at https://www.w3.org/WAI/tutorials/images/
> > > > > > > > > > > > >