This is the way we believed that it should have worked in the first place and that is to follow the proper XML usage (as we did in XHTML 2) and to have a caption element be a child of the drawing. We did not believe that it was in the cards to change things to this degree due to legacy issues so we suggested the use of describedBy.
Now, I don't believe you can make it a child of just the <draw:image> as you will want to caption the entire drawing which could include groupings, lines, etc.
<text:p>
<draw:frame> <!-- outer frame -->
<draw:text-box>
<draw:frame>
<draw:image>
<office:binary-data>picture data
here....</office:binary-data>
</draw:image>
<text:caption>Caption Text</text:caption>
</draw:frame>
</draw:text-box>
</draw:frame>
</text:p>
Some other issues:
The proposal you refer to is to correct this in ODF 1.2. All accessibility changes need to be addressed in ODF 1.1.
The Workplace team discovered one hole in describedBy in that the ID it refers to is in a text:p. However, an oversight by our group is that text-box can take multiple text:p's requiring that the ID value for describedBy be on the <draw:text-box> element should the TC decide to go with describeBy.
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
Chair, IBM Accessibility Architecture Review Board
blog: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=441
"Bruce D'Arcus" <bruce.darcus@OpenDocument.us>
