[23a2a8] Image has non-empty accessible name - Inapplicable Example 1 is arguable

[giacomo-petri]

In Image has non-empty accessible name, Inapplicable example 1 is arguable:

<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="100" height="100">
	<circle cx="50" cy="50" r="40" stroke="green" stroke-width="4" fill="yellow" />
</svg>

Chrome exposes the element as an image in the acc tree, while Firefox treats it as a graphics-document but announces it as an empty image when using a screen reader.

Marking this example as inapplicable forces tools to ignore it as an issue if they aim for full consistency. I suggest removing this specific inapplicable example and adding an Accessibility Support note. Alternatively, we could expand the role's applicability. Either approach works, but I don’t think it should remain inapplicable.

[giacomo-petri]

Applies also to Image accessible name is descriptive - Inapplicable Example 3

[giacomo-petri]

And Image not in the accessibility tree is decorative - Inapplicable Example 4

[giacomo-petri]

Discussed during F2F.

• Chrome exposes it as role="image"
• Firefox exposes it as role="graphics-document"
• Safari exposes it as generic

Next steps:

• remove inapplicable example 1 from the testcases of this rule
• add acc support note
• create WPT

[giacomo-petri]

Moving

And Image not in the accessibility tree is decorative - Inapplicable Example 4

to another issue, since it's quite complex.