Re: [office-accessibility] ODF TC accessibility summary from meetingearlier today

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

Hi,

Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote On 06/14/06 17:04,:
> Hi Bruce,
> 
> 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>

I see to two issues with the above proposal:

1. The OpenDocument specification in section 9.3 states

"In general, an application must not render more than one of the content
elements contained in a frame."

This means, an application would either render the image, or the caption, but
it would not render both.

2. The caption element does not contain any information where the caption
will be rendered (above the frame, or below, which width will it have, etc.). 
Actually, this would also be the case if the caption element would be 
contained in the image element.


> 
> 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.

To solve this issue I would suggest that the describedBy attribute may refer 
to a text:p, but also to a text:section and other block level text elements. 
If a caption shall consist of several paragarphs, one has to add a section 
element, but I don't think that's an issue.

I further would suggest to name the attribute "described-by", because this is 
more in line with the other element/attribute names of ODF (the only 
exception are those the directly include from other specifications).

Just for curiosity: Is there a reason why the relation is from the graphical 
object to the caption, or could the relation also be from the caption to the 
graphical object?

Michael