WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Thread: WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9

for

Number of posts in this thread: 3 (In chronological order)

From: Rachel Ford
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2018 11:20AM
Subject: WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9
No previous message | Next message →

I've run into a bit of a conundrum that I'm hoping someone can help me
with regarding WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9.

If I have an image with text over it (meets color contrast
requirements), the image is decorative, the alt text includes the text
on the image, and the same text is also available in the article below
the image, does this violate 1.4.5 or 1.4.9?

I could argue both sides, so I'd really appreciate some input from
others who are more familiar with the intent of the standards.

Thank you,
Rachel Ford
Henry Ford College

From: glen walker
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2018 11:48AM
Subject: Re: WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9
← Previous message | Next message →

If the image is decorative, I don't see an issue.

The alt text can be "" for decorative images so that the image is ignored.



On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Rachel Ford < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> I've run into a bit of a conundrum that I'm hoping someone can help me
> with regarding WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9.
>
> If I have an image with text over it (meets color contrast
> requirements), the image is decorative, the alt text includes the text
> on the image, and the same text is also available in the article below
> the image, does this violate 1.4.5 or 1.4.9?
>
> I could argue both sides, so I'd really appreciate some input from
> others who are more familiar with the intent of the standards.
>
> Thank you,
> Rachel Ford
> Henry Ford College
> > > > >

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Jul 10 2018 6:31PM
Subject: Re: WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9
← Previous message | No next message

WCAG 1.4.5 is for text embedded in images (not real text overlaid over
an image).

When you have text embedded in an image (e.g. logo bitmap images) that
text cannot be styled (colors or font changed) or enlarged for better
reading (the image resolution makes the text almost impossible to see
at higher resolution).
Therefore 1.4.5 basically says don't use text embedded in images
unless it is the only way to achieve the desired look and feel, e.g.
logo text in artsy or unusual font. If you provide alt text for those
images you help a blind person with a screen reader, but it doesn't
fix the problem for a sighted person who uses screen magnification.
If you are not sure if the text is real text or text embedded in an
image, just try to select it with the mouse, if you can it's real
text.
This does not apply to real text overlaid over a background image.
It also does not apply to SVG images, because the SVG text implemented
using the <text> element is real text that can be styled and enlarged.



On 7/10/18, glen walker < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> If the image is decorative, I don't see an issue.
>
> The alt text can be "" for decorative images so that the image is ignored.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Rachel Ford < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>> I've run into a bit of a conundrum that I'm hoping someone can help me
>> with regarding WCAG 1.4.5 and 1.4.9.
>>
>> If I have an image with text over it (meets color contrast
>> requirements), the image is decorative, the alt text includes the text
>> on the image, and the same text is also available in the article below
>> the image, does this violate 1.4.5 or 1.4.9?
>>
>> I could argue both sides, so I'd really appreciate some input from
>> others who are more familiar with the intent of the standards.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Rachel Ford
>> Henry Ford College
>> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.