Create Text Alternatives guideline

[WilcoFiers]

Previous issues: w3c/silver#257, w3c/silver#342, w3c/silver#402

Open questions

• How should the boundary be drawn between images and other non-text content, such as audio, video, animation, etc. What falls under Text alternatives, and what falls under alternatives for audio and video?

• Is "text alternative" still an appropriate label? On the face of it that suggests alt attributes, rather than other solutions such as SVG titles.

• The outcome should emphasis the text alternative has to be meaningful, appropriate, or equivalent. Context is important in this, and should be clearly included as part of considering what is and isn't meaningful information for the user.

[GreggVan]

On Sep 6, 2023, at 4:29 AM, Wilco Fiers ***@***.***> wrote: Previous issues: w3c/silver#257 <w3c/silver#257>, w3c/silver#342 <w3c/silver#342>, w3c/silver#402 <w3c/silver#402> Open questions How should the boundary be drawn between images and other non-text content, such as audio, video, animation, etc. What falls under Text alternatives, and what falls under alternatives for audio and video?

Can you say more? This is not clear. Images are static Animations and video include moving content — (and I think we have always treated them the same — and just use two terms to be sure we cover everything that is "moving content" Audio is … we….. audio Movies area AV or audio and video But you seem to be asking something else?

Is "text alternative" still an appropriate label? On the face of it that suggests alt attributes, rather than other solutions such as SVG titles.

Text alternative is still appropriate I think. The reason being that Text is unique in that it can be presented visually, via audio, via braille, via morse code (audio or tactile) etc. ALT TEXT is a specific technique but "text alternative" is very generic and technology independent. (And modality independent since it does not imply any presentation mode

The outcome should emphasis the text alternative has to be meaningful, appropriate, or equivalent. Context is important in this, and should be clearly included as part of considering what is and isn't meaningful information for the user.

Yes — good point. This is the one problem we always have to explain. We WANT text equivalent — but we don’t know how to do that for all content. (e.g. what is the text EQUIVALENT for the Mona Lisa, or a concert, or even a performance of a play. The script is a text alternative - and it may have cues as to how to speak it — but a performance by an artist of a play — can’t be captured in words..)

…

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#20>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACNGDXXSSJEBSRRDLGR6S3TXZBNA7ANCNFSM6AAAAAA4NFW4GE>. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

[mraccess77]

The understanding doc for 1.1.1 provides some information on what aspects of audio or video are covered under text alternatives vs. aspects covered by other criteria.
e.g. Time-Based Media
If non-text content is time-based media, then text alternatives at least provide descriptive identification of the non-text content. (Refer to Guideline 1.2 for additional requirements for media.)