W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2010

Re: CFC re ISSUE-31 Missing Alt

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 19:00:13 -0700
Cc: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1192FCD8-3647-4AB7-896B-9F9BAE5DD75D@apple.com>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
'a missing tag' is ambiguous (and 'a missing tag must be generated' could be seen as a contradiction...)

a tag stating that 'alt' is known to be missing, perhaps?

'which can then be...' appears to be connected to the authoring tool, rather than this new tag

overall:
if an authoring tool prompts an author for alt text and the author
explicitly refuses to supply it, then a tag stating that 'alt' is missing MUST be auto-generated by the
authoring tool; the presence of this tag can then be used to trigger a retrieval process
such as that outlined in the emails on RDFPic [1] and the RDF and
Photos W3C Note [2]

I'm not at all sure I agree with this approach, but we may as well be clear about what we are debating!

On Apr 28, 2010, at 16:51 , Laura Carlson wrote:

> Hi Gregory,
> 
>> my 2 cents (american) on an auto-generated authoring-tool inserted
>> missing alt tag:
>> 
>> if an authoring tool prompts an author for alt text and the author
>> explicitly refuses, then a missing tag MUST be auto-generated by the
>> authoring tool, which can then be used to trigger a retrieval process
>> such as that i outlined in my post on RDFPic [1] and the RDF and
>> Photos W3C Note [2]
> 
> Thank you very much for this. I added a section on the Change Proposal
> for metadata using your text as a start.
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Lcarlson/ImgElement#Metadata
> 
> Thoughts everyone? Ideas for improvement? Can anyone not live with this?
> 
> Best Regards,
> Laura
> 
> -- 
> Laura L. Carlson
> 

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 02:00:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:08 GMT