W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Request to Reconsider Alt Guidance Location

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:50:59 +0100
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120223235059563221.abf3377a@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Laura Carlson, Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:33:29 -0600:
> Hi Leif,
> 
>> I think it would be great if the @alt text rules could be simplified.
>> And in that regard, it has been claimed it is better to have short and
>> clear advice rather than longwinded and intricate advice - which can
>> be important too, but short and clear rules are also needed.
> 
> Short and clear:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/objects.html#h-13.8


Well, there seems to be broad agreement that HTML4 did not describe 
things well enough. Longdesc is one thing it was not enough clear 
about. Also, with regard to @alt, then the only normative rule it had - 
at least per the HTML4 validator - was that the author has must either 
leave the attribute empty, or non-empty. And no one read WCAG, despite 
those links.

Nothing is guaranteed. But — and for what it is worth — I think we 
should try to focus on making HTML5 as acceptable as possible, with 
regard to A11Y. To focus on getting the WG to move @alt text from 
HTML5, only seems like a distraction that could hurt — and perhaps 
already have hurt — the attention to the other issues up for decision. 
That's how I see it.
-- 
Leif Halvard Silli
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 22:51:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:53 GMT