This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
1) 11.1 is repeated twice. 2) Logos. From our own testing weve found it useful to inform readers that they are viewing a logo. In your example that just says PIP CO, a blind user would not know if its a photo of a pipco, a photo of PIP COs building, or a logo. Weve found that Logo: PIP CO works well in our studies. 3) Distinguishing between illustrations and photographs. To us who are sighted, theres a big difference between seeing a photograph of something vs. an artists illustration. For example, I have on my desk right now 2 books for identifying birds. One is Birds of North America with illustrations, the other is The Audubon Societys Field Guide to North American Birds with photos. In the illustrated version, the artist can make small bird markings more visible to the reader so that 2 similar birds in a family can be easily distinguished. But in the photographed version, you see the bird in its correct color and habitat, but you might not easily see a distinguishing marking. Essentially, a photo is the real deal and an illustration is an artists interpretation. So it might be helpful to say: Photo: American Bald Eagle and Illustration: American Bald Eagle.
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: partially accepted Change Description: removed duplicate Rationale: I'm marking this "Rejected" because I didn't make any change to the spec. Please let me know if I misunderstood what you were saying. >1) 11.1 is repeated twice. removed duplicate. >2) Logos. whether or not to provide an indication of the presence of a logo is dependent upon the context the image is being used in. In most cases the best course of action if the presenece of the logo is to be indicated would be to provide it with a caption. I will add an example isllustrating this to the spec. >3) Distinguishing between illustrations and photographs. again the best emthod to provide such image categorisation is via a caption. I will add an example isllustrating this to the spec.