1.1.1 Non-text Content

1. What is the goal of this criterion?

Imagine a friend describing a website to you over the phone. Every time there’s an image, all they say is: “There’s a picture here.” Which picture? A product photo? A graphic with the opening hours? The buy button? You’d have no chance of following along.

That’s exactly what people using screen readers experience when images have no text alternatives. So the goal of Success Criterion 1.1.1 is as simple as it is fundamental: every piece of content that isn’t text needs a text alternative that serves the same purpose. It’s the very first criterion in WCAG – and for good reason. Text is the most universal format on the web. It can be read aloud, enlarged, translated and converted into braille.

2. What exactly does it require?

All non-text content presented to users needs a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose. That covers more than many people think:

Informative images need alt text that conveys the information they contain – not a description of what they look like.

Controls and inputs such as icon buttons or linked logos need a name that describes their purpose: “Open search” rather than “Magnifying glass”. Further requirements for controls are covered by Name, Role, Value.

Complex graphics such as charts or infographics need a more detailed description – as a caption, a data table in the text or a linked long description.

Purely decorative images get an empty alt="" so assistive technologies can skip them silently.

Some cases have graded rules: for tests, sensory experiences (such as a piece of music or a painting) and time-based media, a descriptive identification is enough – for example “Piano Concerto No. 1, first movement”. Video and audio themselves are handled separately by the criteria under 1.2. For CAPTCHAs that’s not enough: the text has to identify the purpose, and you also need an alternative form of CAPTCHA for a different sense, such as an audio version next to the image puzzle.

3. Why does it matter for accessibility?

For blind and severely visually impaired people, text alternatives are the only way to access image content. But the circle of people who benefit is wider:

• Screen reader users get the information everyone else sees
• People on slow connections see the alt text before the image loads – or if it never loads
• Braille display users can read image information by touch
• Voice assistants and search engines understand what your images show

Missing text alternatives have been among the most common barriers for years. The annual WebAIM Million analysis of the most visited home pages finds automatically detectable WCAG failures on more than 94 % of them – and missing alt text is consistently among the most frequent issues.

4. How to meet the criterion

The most important step is a change of perspective: don’t ask “What can I see in the image?”, ask “What information is the image meant to convey?”

Write for the purpose. A product photo in a shop: “Blue crew-neck T-shirt, front view” – not “Photo of a T-shirt”.

Name the function, not the appearance. For linked graphics, the destination is what counts: “Home” rather than “Logo”.

Skip the filler. “Image of …” or “Graphic showing …” is redundant – screen readers announce images as images anyway.

Mark decoration consistently. Divider lines, background patterns and mood images get alt="". A missing alt attribute, on the other hand, is a failure, because many screen readers then fall back to reading out the file name.

<!-- Informative -->
<img src="shirt-blue.jpg" alt="Blue crew-neck T-shirt, front view">

<!-- Decorative -->
<img src="wave.svg" alt="">

<!-- Icon button -->
<button type="button" aria-label="Open search">
  <svg aria-hidden="true" focusable="false">…</svg>
</button>

Test automatically and manually. Tools like WAVE or axe reliably find missing alt text. Whether the text is actually useful, though, only a human can judge. You’ll find more hands-on advice in the article Writing good alt text. And watch out for text inside images: Images of Text applies as well.

5. Why this criterion matters for businesses

Alt text is a good example of accessibility and business interests going hand in hand:

1. Better discoverability as a side effect

Accessibility is not a direct Google ranking factor. But search engines can only reliably understand images through text – good alt text helps them make sense of your images, for example in image search. The effect is indirect, but real.

2. Legal requirements

Since 28 June 2025, the European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882) has applied to many consumer products and services, such as online shops; in Germany it is implemented by the Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz (BFSG). The technical benchmark is the harmonised standard EN 301 549, which refers to WCAG 2.1 Level AA for web content – and 1.1.1, as a Level A criterion, is part of that. Missing alt text is one of the fastest findings in any audit – and one of the easiest to fix. (General information, not legal advice.)

3. More reach for your content

Podcast cover, product image or infographic: only with a text alternative does the information truly reach every customer – including those whose email client blocks images. According to the WHO, around 1.3 billion people worldwide live with a significant disability.

6. The success criterion in the W3C’s words

Success Criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (Level A)

All non-text content that is presented to the user has a text alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, except for the situations listed below.

• Controls, Input: If non-text content is a control or accepts user input, then it has a name that describes its purpose. (Refer to Success Criterion 4.1.2 for additional requirements for controls and content that accepts user input.)
• Time-Based Media: If non-text content is time-based media, then text alternatives at least provide descriptive identification of the non-text content. (Refer to Guideline 1.2 for additional requirements for media.)
• Test: If non-text content is a test or exercise that would be invalid if presented in text, then text alternatives at least provide descriptive identification of the non-text content.
• Sensory: If non-text content is primarily intended to create a specific sensory experience, then text alternatives at least provide descriptive identification of the non-text content.
• CAPTCHA: If the purpose of non-text content is to confirm that content is being accessed by a person rather than a computer, then text alternatives that identify and describe the purpose of the non-text content are provided, and alternative forms of CAPTCHA using output modes for different types of sensory perception are provided to accommodate different disabilities.
• Decoration, Formatting, Invisible: If non-text content is pure decoration, is used only for visual formatting, or is not presented to users, then it is implemented in a way that it can be ignored by assistive technology.

In short: everything that isn’t text needs an equivalent text alternative – with defined exceptions for controls, media, tests, sensory experiences, CAPTCHAs and pure decoration.