Using null alt text and no title attribute on img elements for images that AT should ignore

Arman.V.176

THe W3 criterion H67 states that if no title attribute is used, and the alt text is set to null (i.e. alt="") it indicates to assistive technology that the image can be safely ignored.

For each image that should be ignored:

1. Check that title attribute is either absent or empty.
2. Check that alt attribute is present and empty.

Expected Results

• #1 and #2 are true

If
this is a sufficient technique for a success criterion, failing this
test procedure does not necessarily mean that the success criterion has
not been satisfied in some other way, only that this technique has not
been successfully implemented and can not be used to claim conformance.

However, when I run the Brightspace accessibility check it marks images that satisfy rule 1 and 2 as inaccessible. It tells to mark that image as decorative. Doing so adds role="presentation" to that image.

But this is unnessassary as satisfying rule 1 and 2 should be sufficient. Any reason why Brightspace nevertheless makrs those images as inaccessible?

Kind regards,

Arman

Derik.P.149

Even though there is a standard, sometimes software companies provide a different standard. I imagine that D2L wanted it to be more clear and explicit when you want an image to be decorative. Thus the deviation from standard.