tantek__2. object has no equivalent documentation, but has some aspects of specification for fallback content including text alternatives which is potentially much more complex (see my <object> examples above in the logs)
tantek__3. audio, video (, and maybe source) elements separate as well, in that their contents are specifically NOT for fallback content / text alternatives, but rather for old browsers that don't support those elements
tantek__KartikPrabhu: that's a bit of a tangential distraction. a. 'title' is a global attribute (like 'class'), doesn't have to be explicitly listed on each element definition. b. nothing in audio/video elements says *anything* about using 'title' for a text alternative so we should NOT make up such a semantic
tantek__note that you can theoretically use img, iframe, object, OR video (via poster) to put an image in your content, and thus would likely want to put a text alternative as well
tantek__my meta point is that regardless of which of those HTML methods you used, if you put a u-photo (or u-featured etc.) on them, and get a URL as a "value", then ideally you would get the text alternative in the "alt", *regardless* of how each of those specific elements says to markup the text alternative
tantekthis will take more research, but I'm guessing there *may* be more detailed instructions (for audio, video, object) for text alternatives in WCAG 2.1
[jgmac1106]okay good I almost just panicked as I just thought "does that mean my alt-text" isn't displaying on Twitter....well I offer every post on my blog as well so I think legally I am covered...as long as I remember
obiwahn3, Hydraxis29, tantek, Bat`O_, bb1, barpthewire, [jgmac1106], [schmarty], [eddie], jackjamieson, KartikPrabhu, [tantek], TallTed, [kevinmarks] and Enigmagic18 joined the channel