2F - does name from content mean only name?

[kengdoj]

In this example:

<a href=”#”><img alt=”baby shark” title=”doo doo doo”></a>

Would the link <a> have an accessible description?

questions about the following instructions:

2F: "if the current node's role allows name from content"

• does this mean only name is allowed but description from content is not allowed?
• or, if the role is on the list of name from content, then do i, ii, and iii.

Related: 2F.iii.b: "Compute the text alternative... "

• if description from content is not allowed, should this instruction be changed to "Compute the name"?

Thanks!

[JAWS-test]

If I understand this specification, https://www.w3.org/TR/svg-aam-1.0/#mapping_additional_nd and https://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/#accessible-name-and-description-computation correctly, an element only has a description if the description is explicitly declared on the element (e.g. per title, aria-description, aria-describedby, value)

The content is never used as a description with the following exceptions:

• if an element is referenced by aria-describedby, then the accessible name of that element is determined and that name is used as the description of the element with the aria-describedby.
• content of caption in tables, if caption is not used as Accessible Name
• content of summary in details, if summary is not used as Accessible Name
• content of desc in svg

In my opinion, the determination of Accessible Name and Description is so different from each other that it would be better to treat them in 2 separate chapters in this specification (see https://github.com/w3c/accname/issues/77)

[kengdoj]

Thank you, @JAWS-test. I agree that the separate computation instructions would be clearer.