Non-text Content
All non-text content presented to users has a text alternative that serves an equivalent purpose, with specific exceptions for controls, tests, CAPTCHA, and decorative content.
What it means
The intent of this success criterion is to make information conveyed by non-text content accessible through the use of a text alternative. Text alternatives are a primary way for making information accessible because they can be rendered through any sensory modality (for example, visual, auditory or tactile) to match the needs of the user. Providing text alternatives allows the information to be rendered in a variety of ways by a variety of user agents. For example, people who cannot see a picture can have the text alternative read aloud using synthesized speech. People who cannot hear an audio file can have the text alternative displayed so that they can read it. In the future, text alternatives will also allow information to be more easily translated into sign language or into a simpler form of the same language. CAPTCHAs are a controversial topic in the accessibility community. As is described in the paper Inaccessibility of CAPTCHA , CAPTCHAs intrinsically push the edges of human abilities in an attempt to defeat automated processes. Every type of CAPTCHA will be unsolvable by users with certain disabilities. However, they are widely used, and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group believes that if CAPTCHAs were forbidden outright, websites would choose not to conform to WCAG rather than abandon CAPTCHA. This would create barriers for a great many more users with disabilities. For this reason the Working Group has chosen to structure the requirement about CAPTCHA in a way that meets the needs of most people with disabilities, yet is also considered adoptable by sites. Requiring two different forms of CAPTCHA on a given site ensures that most people with disabilities will find a form they can use. Because some users with disabilities will still not be able to access sites that meet the minimum requirements, the Working Group provides recommendations for additional steps. Organizations motivated to conform to WCAG should be aware of the importance of this topic and should go as far beyond the minimum requirements of the guidelines as possible. Additional recommended steps include:
Failing example
<!-- Fails: no alt attribute -->
<img src="product-photo.jpg">
<!-- Fails: empty alt on informative image -->
<img src="chart-q3-revenue.png" alt="">How to fix it
<!-- Pass: descriptive alt text -->
<img src="product-photo.jpg" alt="Blue running shoe with mesh upper">
<!-- Pass: empty alt for decorative image -->
<img src="decorative-divider.png" alt="">
<!-- Pass: complex image with longer description -->
<img src="chart-q3-revenue.png" alt="Q3 revenue chart showing 23% growth">How A11yRisk detects this
A11yRisk detects this criterion automatically.
Scan your site for this violation →