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

Re: missing attribute/crowdsourcing (was Re: Discussion: Text Alternative Survey)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:39:23 +0000 (UTC)
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004292333150.14147@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010, Laura Carlson wrote:
> 
> Can anyone not live with the missing attribute/crowdsourcing option 
> going back into the proposal?

I don't understand what it gives us that the spec doesn't already give us.

The attribute would indicate that the author had failed to provide the 
alt="" attribute's value, right? But we already know that's the case, 
since the alt="" attribute isn't present.

It isn't any more reliable than any of the other mechanisms we have, 
either; people could accidentally put this attribute in (e.g. through copy 
and paste), or could put it in due to misunderstandings (e.g. to shut up 
the validator).

In fact, it seems like it would legitimise not including alt="" 
attributes, which would be a significant step backwards.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 23:39:53 GMT

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