W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2011

Re: [text] updated draft of clarification on alt validation

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:46:43 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTik0W9PWp0Aj75QnJEX2-wp-6kf7yQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Steve Faulkner
<faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
> "It would be interesting to know what would happen if UAs simply rendered@title when @alt is absent."
>
> This is prohibited in the spec.

Yes, I think that's a dangerous prohibition.

> So the use of title would undermine the detailed usage rules of alt that provide end users with meaningful text alternatives.

I don't follow this step.

> Even if the title were rendered like alt it does not solve the many other accessibility issues to do with title.

Yes, but those need to be solved anyway.

> Title content is meant to be available to all at any time, not only when images are disabled.

Yes. That's not incompatible with displaying @title when images are
disabled and @alt is missing.

> Currently it is not nor has it been and 2 vendors have indicated no plans to change this.

Indeed, and I think the reluctance of vendors to change how @title is
implemented
is the strongest argument against the Chair's decision.

But I think this reluctance may perhaps be blocking a technically
superior approach.
I think one of the vendor's mentioned the need for design input, so it
does seem like
there's more conversation to be had about this.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Friday, 29 April 2011 11:47:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:19 UTC