Images

The Standards

Section 508 Standards:

  • Standard 1194.22, a “A text equivalent for every non-text element shall be provided (e.g., via “alt”, “longdesc”, or in element content).” (Section508.gov)

WCAG 2.0 Guidelines:

  • Guideline 1.1: “Provide text alternatives for any non-text content so that it can be changed into other forms people need, such as large print, braille, speech, symbols or simpler language.” (W3C)

What do the Standards Mean?

Note: the terms alternative textalt attributealt tag and alt text are used interchangeably when referring to adding a text equivalent to non-text content.

For content to be compliant, a text equivalent must be provided for all non-text content.  Non-text content includes, but is not limited to, images, charts, maps, graphs, symbols, etc.  Providing a text equivalent allows for the non-text content to be presented via auditory and tactile means, based on the needs of the user, in addition to also being rendered visually.

The overall principles for adding alternative text to images can also be applied other non-text content such as applets, embedded media, and plug-ins. When creating alternative text it is important to convey not only the content of the image but also the function, if applicable (e.g. image buttons, image maps, or image links).

When determining the appropriate alternative text, it is important to consider the content and function of an image. The alternative text for images can vary based on the context of the image itself.  For images within a link, or functional images, the alternative text should describe the content and function of the image.

Alternative text can be conveyed through the use of an alt attribute associated with the img element or within the context of the image.  Alt attributes should succinctly describe the content conveyed by the element, without being too verbose (for simple objects) or too vague (for detailed objects).

Some best practices for alt attributes are:

  • Be accurate
  • Be succinct when describing the content and function, if applicable, of the image
  • Avoid redundancy between the alt attribute and the context of the image
  • Avoid the use of phrase like “picture of…” or “image of…” when describing the image unless it is relevant content

To be accessible, all images must have an alt attribute even if that alt attribute is empty or null (e.g., alt=” ”).  Decorative graphics are an example of images with null/empty alt attributes. These images do not convey information relevant to the content of the web page and are not links.

There are times when description may not be succinct enough to use an alt attribute AND a description does not appear in the content of the page. This is common for complex images such as charts, maps, and graphs. If adding a long description to the content of the page is not feasible then it is best to use the longdesc attribute.  This attribute can be used in a couple of ways:

  • The image can be a link to the long description page.  Note:  Alternative text should be provided for the image.
  • A link can be added to the content of the page next to the image

As of September 2015, there is no visual indicator that a longdesc has been provided with an image.  Until longdesc is better supported, the recommended best practice is to provide a standard link to a longer description along with the longdesc.

Although providing alternative text for images sounds simple, it is one of the most difficult standards to implement.  Perhaps that’s why there are some many images on the web with missing, poor, or incorrect alternative text.

WebAIM provides some good examples on how to determine appropriate alternative text for images on their Alternative Text web page.

Legal Cases

The Kindle Case

The suit against Case Western Reserve University over a pilot that used the Kindle for textbooks was the wake-up call to colleges. In the Dear Colleague Letter in 2010, the departments of justice and education made it clear that technologies and content must be accessible for all.  On Thursday, May 26, 2011, the US Department of Education (DOE) released an FAQ document related to the use and accessibility of emerging technology in educational institutions.  This document is a follow-up to the Dear Colleague letter (DCL).  The FAQ clarifies the scope of the DCL, provides key definitions and specifies the department’s intent regarding what technology the letter does and does not apply to.

One of the early clarifications is that the letter does not intend to prohibit the use of emerging technology in educational environments.  Throughout the FAQ document, the DOE states and uses explicit examples to demonstrate how new technology can be utilized in college and university classrooms to allow students to “acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as sighted students” with “substantially equivalent ease of use.”

The DOE also specifically recognizes that innovations in technology have the opportunity to improve the educational experiences of all students, especially those with disabilities. In regards to e-book readers and alternative print media, the department has provided examples within the FAQ document to clarify its position regarding the provision of traditional alternative media.  In question 12, the DOE indicates that traditional media is still a viable accommodation; however, “the alternative media must provide access to the benefits of technology in an equally effective and equally integrated manner” as the new technology used.  This means that campuses cannot rely on their traditional alternative media provision alone; each case must be determined on a case by case basis based on what technology the campus is using.  As an example, the DOE cites the use of electronic book readers in a library setting that are not accessible. As an alternative, the college purchased tablet computers with additional accessibility features to provide to students with disabilities.  The DOE has indicated that this is an appropriate accommodation, whereas providing a person to read the inaccessible material to the student would not be.

The DOE also clarified that the letter is intended to apply to use of educational technology beyond the use of e-book readers, stating, “all school programs or activities – whether in a ‘brick and mortar,’ online, or other ‘virtual’ context – must be operated in a manner that complies with Federal disability discrimination laws.”  The FAQs also directly state that any pilot programs involving new technology must also be accessible to students with disabilities.  The DOE has clearly indicated that it is expecting colleges and universities to plan for accessibility during all phases of introducing new technology on campus, from initial consideration through piloting and implementation.

As indicated in the FAQ document, professional development for faculty and staff around the issues of emerging technology and accessibility may be needed.


Penn State

Around the same time as the Kindle case, Penn State University settled a suit with the National Federation of the Blind, leading to massive changes for the institution. An excellent website on accessibility was one of the products of this lawsuit.  Review that settlement and bookmark the Penn State website!


Publisher Resources

In 2013, Louisiana Technical University settled with the justice department over the use of a publisher product “MyOMLab” that was not accessible for blind students. This has drawn attention to the issue with using third-party tools.


Harvard and MIT

Then in 2015, a suit from National Association of the Deaf against Harvard and MIT for their EdX courses stating they violated antidiscrimination laws over not having closed captions in MOOCs made headlines. EdX settled in April 2015, and is required to “provide accurate captioning for the deaf, oral navigation signals for the blind, and programming changes so those with dexterity disabilities can navigate content without struggling with a hand-operated mouse,” among other stipulations, according to a Department of Justice press release.

It’s important to note that when an institution is sued over accessibility, the faculty member is named in the suit as well. These are just a FEW of the examples of cases that institutions and faculty have had to deal with.  If you are interested in exploring further, Laura Carlson from the University of Minnesota Duluth has compiled an extensive list.

Definition of Terms

Disabilities – definition from the World Health Organization (WHO)

“Disabilities is an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. An impairment is a problem in body function or structure; an activity limitation is a difficulty encountered by an individual in executing a task or action; while a participation restriction is a problem experienced by an individual in involvement in life situations.

Disability is thus not just a health problem. It is a complex phenomenon, reflecting the interaction between features of a person’s body and features of the society in which he or she lives. Overcoming the difficulties faced by people with disabilities requires interventions to remove environmental and social barriers.”

Reference URL: http://www.who.int/topics/disabilities/en/

Accommodation – definition from Empire State College Disability Services

“An accommodation is a modification to a program, task or event that allows an individual with a disability to participate fully. Accommodations must be effective to ensure equal access, but may not reduce program standards or present an undue financial or administrative burden to the institution.”

Reference URL: http://www.esc.edu/disability-services/student-handbook/ 

Accessibility – definition from Be Accessible

“Accessibility is all about our ability to engage with, use, participate in, and belong to, the world around us.”

Reference URL: http://www.beaccessible.org.nz/the-movement/what-is-accessibility 

Source

Accessibility: Designing and Teaching Courses for All Learners.(n.d.). Retrieved from https://learn.canvas.net/courses/831