Removed assumption about browsers handling images with empty alt in different ways - I hasn't been true for several years (#2274)

Co-authored-by: Carlos Duarte <carlosapaduarte@gmail.com>

Author: giacomo-petri

_rules/image-non-empty-accessible-name-23a2a8.md

@@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ There are no assumptions.
 
 ### Accessibility Support
 
-- There are several popular browsers that do not treat images with an empty `alt` attribute (`alt=""`) as having a role of `presentation` but instead add the `img` element to the accessibility tree with a [semantic role][] of either `img` or `graphic`.
 - Implementation of [Presentational Roles Conflict Resolution][] varies from one browser or assistive technology to another. Depending on this, some [semantic][semantic role] `img` elements can fail this rule with some technology but users of other technologies would not experience any accessibility issue.
 - Images can have their role set to `presentation` through an empty `alt` attribute. [Presentational Roles Conflict Resolution][] does not specify what to do if such an image is [focusable][] (it only specifies what to do in case of explicit `role="none"` or `role="presentation"`). Some browsers expose these images and some don't. Thus, this rule may fail for technologies that expose these without creating an accessibility issue for users of other technologies.
 - `svg` elements have an [implicit role][] of `graphics-document` in [svg-aam](https://www.w3.org/TR/svg-aam-1.0/#details-id-66). There are popular browsers that do not follow [svg-aam](https://www.w3.org/TR/svg-aam-1.0/#details-id-66) and instead expose SVG elements with a different [semantic role][], such as `image`, `generic` or `SvgRoot`.