> On 29 Jan 2026, at 08:40, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 28-Jan-26 22:12, Martin Thomson wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026, at 20:04, Eliot Lear wrote: >>>>> Incidental use of math in figures can still use textual or SVG >>>>> alternatives, provided that any math content is not normatively relevant. >>> >>> >>> That seems closer to an IETF stream matter rather than series matter. >> Say more? Do you imagine that the IS would need different rules? >> This is motivated by the accessibility requirement. Math that is only SVG >> or only monospace Unicode art is only accessible to sighted readers, whereas >> whatever format we might eventually come up with (MathML or something else) >> that is math-aware. > > I agree, but the word "normative" is a bit loaded towards the IETF standards > track. So a friendly amendment: > > "Incidental use of math in figures can still use textual or SVG alternatives, > provided that any math content is only illustrative."
While I can’t find the reference, I’m sure there is already a requirement somewhere along the lines of "anything important in a diagram must also be in the text". Jay > > Brian > > -- > rswg mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director [email protected] -- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
