No implicit role for <img> with alt=""

[othree]

Hi, I found the implicit role of <img> with alt="" is incorrect.
The document from W3C says it should have the corresponding role.

Ref: https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aria/#docconformance

[othree]

I didn't update the test because I am not sure how to test role=''

[ljharb]

The linked document says “no corresponding role” should NOT be used, and that the explicit options are “none” or “presentation”. What are we reading differently?

[jessebeach]

The presentation role "MAY be used". Returning it explicitly in this case does feel a little ambiguous, yes. @othree have you observed aberrant behavior in the plugin because it returns a role of presentation for <img alt="" />?

I'd like to see the failing tests fixed so we better understand how this change ripples through the plugin. It might make sense to make it, but I'm not sure yet.

[jessebeach]

Comments added above. Please fix the failing tests and then we'll decide if we should proceed with the change.

[othree]

This is what I got yesterday.

Trying to fill the test code.

[jessebeach]

@othree I see. Yes, that's not technically correct. I agree with the change.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 99.442% when pulling 477966f on othree:master into df9ce85 on evcohen:master.

[othree]

I updated the test. And found if no 'role' provided. The aria attribute check will always pass.
So I update the invalid case to alt='foobar' instead of alt=''.

[ljharb]

why remove all these?

[othree]

Because the implicit role is not presentation.
The only way to change the role to presentation is by assigning it in the attribute.
But I didn't see any test case in this file have an assigned role.
All cases are using other ways to switch role, e.g. change value of type

[jessebeach]

@othree this is great, thank you for the test fixes. I appreciate the punctilious attention to spec detail :)