Skip to main content

Home/ Web Accessibility/ Group items tagged alt text

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Vernon Fowler

WebAIM: Appropriate use of alternative text - 0 views

webaim.org/...alttext

accessibility standards reading usability alternative text

shared by Vernon Fowler on 13 Aug 12 - No Cached
  • It is read by screen readers in place of images allowing the content and function of the image to be accessible to those with visual or certain cognitive disabilities. It is displayed in place of the image in user agents (browsers) that don't support the display of images or when the user has chosen not to view images. It provides a semantic meaning and description to images which can be read by search engines or be used to later determine the content of the image from page context alone.
  • The first step when determining appropriate alternative text for an image is to decide if the image presents content and if the image has a function. In most cases, an image will only have a function if it is contained within a link.
  • NOT use the phrases "image of ..." or "graphic of ..." to describe the image.
  • ...14 more annotations...
  • NOT be redundant or provide the exact same information as text within the context of the image.
  • (no alt attribute) is never the right choice
  • When possible, avoid using "link to" or "click this image" or similar wording in the alt attribute. Links are identified as links by screen readers and should be visually apparent to sighted users.
  • Decorative images do not present important content, are used for layout or non-informative purposes, and do not appear within a link. In almost all cases, spacer and decorative images should have null alt text (alt="").
  • Option C (alt="") would be most appropriate in this case because the image does not convey relevant or important content.
  • Form image buttons must have an alt attribute that describes the function of the button. Image buttons are often used to provide a more visually appealing or a smaller version of the standard form buttons. The alternative text should describe what the button will do when selected, such as "Search", "Submit", "Register", "Place your order", etc. For instance, <input type="image" alt="Submit Search"> might be appropriate for an image button on a site search form.
  • text must be provided to the user which presents the CONTENT and FUNCTION of the images within your web content
  • In many cases, images may be given an empty or null alt attribute (e.g., alt="").
  • Option B is the best choice - it clearly provides the content that is being presented by the image - that the link is to a PDF file.
  • Because this is fairly standard practice, providing alternative text for the image, such as your company name (alt="Acme Company), will usually suffice.
  • It is important to note here that if the icon itself were the link to the document, the alternative text should provide a full alternative of the content and function of the link/image combination. Something like, "Download the employment application in PDF format".
  • Alternative text should: presents the CONTENT and FUNCTION of the image. be succinct.
  • Alternative text should not: be redundant (be the same as adjacent or body text). use the phrases "image of…" or "graphic of…".
  • Alt text of a functional image (e.g., an image within a link) should describe the function as well as the content.
Vernon Fowler

WebAIM: Alternative Text - 0 views

webaim.org/alttext

accessibility resources alt text images logos figure markup html

shared by Vernon Fowler on 27 Nov 13 - No Cached
  • Alternative text should not: be redundant (be the same as adjacent or body text). use the phrases "image of…" or "graphic of…".
  • Identifying the logo as actually being a logo (alt="Acme Company Logo") is not typically necessary.
  • If the fact that an image is a photograph or illustration, etc. is important content, it may be useful to include this in alternative text.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Decorative images do not present important content, are used for layout or non-informative purposes, and do not appear within a link. In almost all cases, spacer and decorative images should have null alt text (alt="").
  • In current practice on the web, many such images are given descriptive alternative text even though the images don't seem to provide useful content. Option C (alt="") would probably be most appropriate in this case because the image does not convey relevant or important content.
  • Alternative text should: presents the CONTENT and FUNCTION of the image. be succinct.
  • Decorative images still need an alt attribute, but it should be null (alt="").
Vernon Fowler

On Alt Text ∙ An A List Apart Blog Post - 0 views

alistapart.com/...on-alt-text

alt text images accessibility usability design standards

shared by Vernon Fowler on 10 Feb 13 - No Cached
  • Any web designer or developer with her heart in the right place knows that, to be accessible, every image requires an alt text. Except when it doesn’t.
  • In this case, then, it is better to use the null alt (alt=”“), and that is what we did in the A List Apart redesign.
Vernon Fowler

WebAIM: Links and Hypertext - Link Text and Appearance - 0 views

webaim.org/...link_text

links hypertext link text accessibility usability UX webdesign

shared by Vernon Fowler on 26 Mar 14 - No Cached
  • links are more useful when they make sense out of context
  • In most cases, it is better to use human-readable text instead of the URL.
  • The alternative text should convey the content of the image and the function of the link. In most cases, the content of the image and function of the link are the same, so this text can be very succinct (e.g, alt="Products").
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • When images are used as links, the alternative text performs the function of link text.
  • on both mouse hover and keyboard focus
  • they are also accustomed to seeing tabs and main navigational features (oftentimes created as graphics rather than text) without underlining. In these cases, the linked items should be designed so it is apparent that the user can click on them to perform an action.
  • Authors should avoid non-informative link phrases such as: click here here more read more link to [some link destination] info
  • adjacent links should have adequate whitespace (such as link CSS margins) between them to minimize users inadvertently clicking the wrong link
  • an alphabetical index may use each individual letter of the alphabet as a link
Vernon Fowler

Image ALT Tag Tips for HTML | AccessAbility - 0 views

accessibility.psu.edu/imageshtml

alt tag markup accessibility images

shared by Vernon Fowler on 18 Feb 14 - No Cached
  • Alt text with acronyms should be written with spaces in between letters. For instance, <alt="I T S at P S U" > (read by a screen reader as "ITS at PSU")
  • While there is no official length restriction on the length of alt text, many experts recommend 125 characters or fewer because of restrictions within the JAWS screen reader.
  • LONGDESC has incomplete support among both visual browsers and screen readers, and is deprecated in HTML5.
Sandra Earl

WebAIM: Screen Reader Survey Results - 0 views

webaim.org/...screenreadersurvey

accessibility vision blindness screen reader WebAIM general FUSION09

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • We received 1121 valid responses to the screen reader survey, which was conducted Dec. 2008 - Jan. 2009.
  • Skip to content22% Skip to main content28%
  • 33 respondents (2.9%) reported being both deaf and blind.
  • ...33 more annotations...
  • Please rate your computer proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert22% Advanced44% Intermediate27% Beginner8%
  • Please rate your screen reader proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert17% Advanced41% Intermediate32% Beginner9%
  • Screen Reader Usage
  • Of the 1121 respondents, 74% use JAWS, 23% use Window-Eyes, 8% use NVDA, and 6% use VoiceOver. While several other screen readers were reported, these were the most prominently reported. Individual versions of screen readers are not yet computed, but generally the majority of users are using the most up-to-date version of their screen reader.
  • How soon do you update your screen reader after a new version is released? Upgrade Window% of Respondents Immediately41% First 6 months25% 6-12 months9% 1-2 years9% 2-3 years4% 3+ years6% No response6%
  • How customized are your screen reader settings? (e.g., changed verbosity, installed scripts, etc.) Response% of Respondents A lot29% Somewhat40% Slightly21% Not at all7% No response4%
  • a lot or some customization was reported by only 27.6% of respondents with no disability versus 71.4% for those that reported blindness.
  • 78% of respondents reported using a screen reader on a desktop computer, 54% use a screen reader on a laptop, and 12% use a screen reader on a mobile phone.
  • No respondents who use screen readers for evaluation reported using a screen reader on a mobile device.
  • Which web browser(s) do you currently use with a screen reader? Browser% of Respondents IE633% IE768% IE82% Firefox39% Safari6%
  • Respondents with no disability were nearly twice as likely to list Firefox as blind respondents - 66% to 37%.
  • The percentage of Safari users is over double that of the overall population - this may be due in part to the fact that some in the Mac community actively solicited survey participation and encouraged respondents to indicate their Safari use, perhaps partially due to feeling snubbed because we didn't list them with IE and Firefox as direct choices.
  • When first accessing a new, unfamiliar home page, I'm most likely to... Response% of Respondents Read through the home page46% Navigate through or listen to the links on the page35% Use the Search to find what I'm looking for13% Look for a site map or site index3% No Response2%
  • Interestingly, the more proficient screen reader users are more likely to read through the home page and use links less often than less proficient screen reader users. This may be due to faster reading speeds for more experienced users. The home page strategies used were very similar regardless of proficiency, disability, or amount of screen reader use.
  • I use "skip to content" or "skip navigation" links... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10% No Response4%
  • Some questions were of a technical nature and we understand that many participants may not have been very technically savvy. Responses may also be based upon user experiences with web content that is generally inaccessible. We cannot help but wonder if responses may have been different if screen reader interactions with web content were typically very positive.
  • I use Access keys... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10%
  • I navigate by headings... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available52% Often24%
  • 76% always or often navigating by headings when they are available.
  • I use site search functionality... Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available26% Often25% Sometimes31%
  • Find the word "Search"18% Jump to the first text/edit field on the page25%
  • Jump to the first form element in a page36%
  • Proficient screen reader users were more than twice as likely to jump directly to the form or text/edit field than less proficient users. Less proficient users were nearly three times more likely to use more manual methods (reading, tabbing, or finding) than more proficient users.
  • a majority of respondents seldom or never use site maps. There was no marked difference in the use of site maps across screen reader proficiency or disability. In general, it appears that site maps may be beneficial, but are not commonly accessed by screen reader users.
  • Text-only versions are always used by many and never used by many. As such, it is very difficult to interpret the value they have for screen reader users. More proficient screen reader users were much less likely to use text-only versions than less proficient users. This may suggest that proficient users employ sufficient techniques to render the main version acceptable to them. Or, it may suggest that proficient users do not gain value in using text-only versions, which are often less than optimal.
  • If content is identified as being "for screen reader users", how often do you use it? Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available38% Often15% Sometimes25% Seldom13%
  • A closer analysis, however, reveals that pop-up windows are reported as very difficult twice as often by less proficient screen reader users than with higher proficiency. Alternatively, more proficient users were three times more likely to indicate that pop-up windows are not at all difficult. This shows that less proficient screen reader users (which represent 41% of respondents) have more difficult experiences with pop-up windows.
  • Firefox users were much more likely to give a favorable response, perhaps a reflection of Firefox support for ARIA, etc. Evaluators and those without disabilities were nearly twice as likely to indicate that these applications are not very or not at all accessible than those that always use screen readers or have disabilities. This may suggest that these applications are actually more accessible than evaluators believe them to be, or alternatively, that screen reader users with disabilities are less knowledgeable about the true inaccessibility of these technologies.
  • 66% of evaluators preferred that the image be ignored, compared to only 28% of those that always user a screen reader. Similarly, 65% of those with no disability preferred that the image be ignored, compared to 29% of those with disabilities.
  • If a web page contains a photo of the White House, I prefer that the image be identified as... Response% of Respondents Photo of the White House80%
  • 69.4% of evaluators found them difficult compared to only 42.6% of those that always use a screen reader. Those with higher screen reader proficiency naturally found these links easier.
  • 71.5% of screen reader users reported that Flash is difficult
  • While the majority (58%) of users reported that frames are easy, those that are blind were 3 1/2 times more likely to indicate that they are easy than those with no disability. Similarly, those that always use a screen reader reported frames as easy nearly 3 times more often than evaluators. This perhaps suggests a misconception among those that do not have disabilities that frames are very inaccessible when in fact those with disabilities find them easy.
Sandra Earl

BBC Internet Blog - 0 views

www.bbc.co.uk/...free_range_widgets.html

adobe air accessibility online help

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • We considered a few approaches, but decided to grow our new widget out of Adobe Flex and Adobe AIR. This is firstly because these tools met our requirements to work cross-platform and deliver the desktop experience we wanted, and also because they linked up with in-house skills in the team which manages them, making them simpler to manage.
  • BBC Future Media & Technology's pilot widget application BBC LiveUpdate uses the Adobe AIR runtime, which is dependent on users downloading and installing a plugin to their desktop, but which unfortunately does not currently support screenreaders (or other software which relies on the Microsoft Active Accessibility layer for assistive technologies). We're working with Adobe to make tools built with AIR more accessible than current products wherever possible and are committed to delivering accessible services. As this is a beta product, there are also other limitations in how much we have been able to establish accessibility support in the following areas:Colour contrast cannot be alteredText size cannot be alteredLacks consistent alt textLacks Title attributesIs not entirely tabbable.
1 - 8 of 8
Showing 20▼ items per page