Yes, you are correct. I got confused with the font shapes and did not look close enough. Thanks a bunch. On Tue, Sep 17, 2024 at 11:45 AM Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:

Am 17.09.24 um 08:05 schrieb Shiv Shankar Dayal:

...

Suppose I use dejavu fonts for the main document then how can I have metafun use the same fonts for labelling. All the metafun code is inline.

MetaFun usually uses the main font. If it doesn’t, check if you set it up before you create your graphics.

If there’s a problem, make a minimal example (MWE).

Hraban ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman3/lists/ntg-context.ntg.nl webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / https://context.aanhet.net (mirror) archive : https://github.com/contextgarden/context wiki : https://wiki.contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

-- Respect, Shiv Shankar Dayal

Am 17.09.24 um 12:48 schrieb Steffen Wolfrum:

Hi,

in summer 2015 there was a thread about accessibility.

Today I am looking for a solution for «images with alternate text» (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt_attribute ). In HTML it looks like this:

<img src="example.jpg" alt="Example text">

Is there an equivalent for this with ConTeXt?

AFAIK not. There’s \pdfbackendactualtext{visible}{alternative}, maybe it works with images, never tried. If definitively doesn’t work with all PDF viewers/libraries, e.g. everything that uses Apple’s PDF library ignores the alternative. Hraban

On 9/18/24 08:04, Steffen Wolfrum wrote:

It is a «new» European law: European Accessibility Act (EAA). Until 28th of June 2025 it has to be transposed by EU-members into national law. E.g. Germany will have a «Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz» (BFSG) in June 2025.

Hi Steffen, this is Directive UE/2019/882 (https://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/882/oj), which requires national law to be enforced (so it seems weird [at least to me] to call UE directives “laws“). Incorporation into national law (sorry, this is “transposition” in EU-ideolect [https://www.eca.europa.eu/Other publications/EN_TERMINOLOGY_PUBLICATION/EN_TERMINOLOGY_PUBLICATION.pdf#page=56]) was due more than two years ago (28/06/2022). These legal texts shall enter into force in 28/06/2025 (according to article 31 of the said directive [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32019L0882#d1...]). Incorporations into national law by each State may be found at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/NIM/?uri=CELEX:32019L0882. BTW, according to these data, Germany seems to have changed even its »Grundgesetz« because of this accesibility directive. Just another comment, please avoid hijacking message threads, since they break how message threads are displayed. When starting a message with a new subject, avoid replying to a message from the list erasing the old subject and body. In that case, the old message header (with references and in-reply-to fields) remains the same. In this case, your message contains the in-reply-to the message-id value from https://mailman.ntg.nl/archives/list/ntg-context@ntg.nl/message/UFWZUB6WLY3P... and the reference to the original thread opening (https://mailman.ntg.nl/archives/list/ntg-context@ntg.nl/message/A3FVUDZVLZXB...). The more detailed explanation only intends to show why replying to a message to create a new thread breaks the display of message threads. Just in case it might help, Pablo

On 9/20/24 21:22, Steffen Wolfrum wrote:

Hi Pablo,

sorry, I do not understand anything... [...] What do you mean by all of this? My question was about how «alt text» can be provied by ConTeXt.

Hi Steffen, sorry for not being clearer and more accurate in my previous reply. Since Hraban already gave a reply, I thought it was important to have the whole context to the new accessibility requirements for digital content generated (as this is related to ConTeXt).

Why do you repeat and list all these legal details?

I gave the legal details because I thought that they probably contained requirements that ConTeXt might need to have them implemented. In fact, it would be wise to see what is required and what may be needed in ConTeXt (starting a new wiki page for accessibility).

...

[...] The more detailed explanation only intends to show why replying to a message to create a new thread breaks the display of message threads.

When I click on one of the two links you have posted, it will open «Same font for metafun as document» What is this?

The main thread which the accesibility thread belongs to. Sorry if the attached image displays what may be already clear to you, but it displays all messages as a single thread (with Thunderbird).

I never saw or read this thread, so why do you think my email hijacked something? What have I done wrong?

Sorry if that wasn’t clear in my previous message, I‘m sure the issue with thread was not intended. What already happened is not important (it just helps to increase the visibility of new threads). I only mentioning this issue right now to rule out this is not a bug, especially in HyperKitty. From your message headers, it looks like you use Apple Mail. If you go to the original message you sent starting the accessibility thread, press Shift-Command-H to toogle full header display. If the full header contains "In-Reply-To:" and you didn’t compose your new message by replying to another one, somehow your mail program understood your new message as a reply. If the full header doesn’t contain any "In-Reply-To:" field, it seems that HyperKitty considered your new message as a reply to an old one. Sorry for insisting, the message to be checked is the one you originally sent to the list (which should be in your folde for sent messages), not the one received in your inbox. I hope it might help now, Pablo

On 9/21/24 21:48, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:

Am 21.09.24 um 15:26 schrieb Pablo Rodriguez via ntg-context:

...

[...] Sorry if that wasn’t clear in my previous message, I‘m sure the issue with thread was not intended. What already happened is not important (it just helps to increase the visibility of new threads).

It might be a problem of some email client(s) where the message IDs got mixed up or something like that. I can’t see this wrong thread in Thunderbird.

In that case, sorry for the noise to everybody. Pablo