Edit comment LC-1657 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-959 Next: LC-960

Comment LC-1657: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Item number: 1.1.1

Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change)

The fourth bullet in 1.1.1 says "If non-text content is pure decoration, or used only for visual formatting, or if it is not presented to users, it is implemented such that it can be ignored by assistive technology."

The strong implication is that this provision is there to make for less "babble" of unwanted descriptions of items with little/no non-visual intent. This is typically done by using "" (null alt-text) in place of "alt", "longdesc", whatever and does make for a less-cluttered audio environment in the case of a screen reader.

Of greater significance is that it erects an exclusionary wall around a blind user who might be working in a Web Shop and in order to properly deal with the elements in question would be shut out from meaningful communication with co-workers.

This should be re-examined from that point of view.

Proposed Change:

"pure decoration" should not be exempt from descriptive mandates via
text. It is OK to make it easy for some blanket filtering, perhaps by
putting "decor" at the
beginning of the alt-text and having the screen reader know therefrom to
not voice that one.; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMC] Late comment Discussed in the 05 April 2007 telecon: resolution: accept LC-1657 Decorative non-text content as amended http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/04/05-wai-wcag-minutes.html {not-accept}; Resolution: The fourth bullet of SC 1.1.1 requires that "decorative" content be implemented so that it can be ignored by AT. It is up to the AT to decide whether or not to ignore it. We agree that it would be useful for AT to provide different modes or filters, depending on the user's preference. However, unless the content has been identified as decorative, the user agent will be unable to provide that choice. The success criterion in WCAG are intended to cover the normal mode of operation to an end user. A blind developer working in a Web shop would probably be able to use different tools to view the content than an end user (e.g. viewing the source), and so would not be excluded in the manner suggested.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)