- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 12:08:36 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9678 steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #1 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> 2010-08-16 12:08:35 --- EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: <http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html>. Status: accepted Change Description: rationale added to spec Rationale: An image contains relevant information, an alternative interpretation of which is available in the same document as structured text. Using an empy alt attribute hides an image from some users, which is incorrect, the image is not meaningless, it contains information which a range of users could interpret with the aid of the short text alternative and longer description. It also provides a text alternative for users who have images turned off in their browsers, so they can if they wish load and view the image. If an empty alt attribibute is present there may be no indication that an image is present. Also if a description of an image is provided in a document, a programmatic association between the image and the descriptive text is required, using an empty alt attribute on the image effectively precludes the assigning of a programmatic association. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 16 August 2010 12:08:37 UTC