Section
https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/package-metadata-authoring-guide/#image-description, https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/package-metadata-authoring-guide/#identify-alt
Describe the problem
A common case where guidance would be helpful is the following: there are no images in the actual work (or all images are decorative), but alt text has been supplied for the cover and possibly for corporate logos and similar content. Should the publication declare alternativeText?
The cover image and publisher-added extraneous visual content are excluded from consideration when determining accessMode visual. Should they also be excluded when determining whether alternativeText should be set?
I would also like to point out that the description of this feature under C.1 Alternative text seems slightly misleading:
It is generally easy to determine if XHTML content documents have alternative text, as it only requires checking that an HTML alt attribute is present on each non-decorative img tag.
Of course, the presence of an alt attribute is not enough: the attribute must contain meaningful alternative text. In addition, whether an image is decorative can't be inferred from the img tag itself. This requires evaluating the image in its context.
Describe the fix or new feature you propose
No response
Section
https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/package-metadata-authoring-guide/#image-description, https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/package-metadata-authoring-guide/#identify-alt
Describe the problem
A common case where guidance would be helpful is the following: there are no images in the actual work (or all images are decorative), but alt text has been supplied for the cover and possibly for corporate logos and similar content. Should the publication declare alternativeText?
The cover image and publisher-added extraneous visual content are excluded from consideration when determining accessMode visual. Should they also be excluded when determining whether alternativeText should be set?
I would also like to point out that the description of this feature under C.1 Alternative text seems slightly misleading:
Of course, the presence of an alt attribute is not enough: the attribute must contain meaningful alternative text. In addition, whether an image is decorative can't be inferred from the img tag itself. This requires evaluating the image in its context.
Describe the fix or new feature you propose
No response