W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Maxmizing Useful alt Text (Was: Baby Steps or Backwards Steps?)

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:05:19 +0100
To: public-html@w3.org
Cc: wai-xtech@w3.org
Message-ID: <20070816120519.GC10695@stripey.com>

Jason White writes:

> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 08:34:35PM +1000, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> 
> > ... which is better for a non-decorative content image, in the cases
> > where good alternative text is not available?
> 
> The most important consideration, however, is to design HTML producing
> applications so as to minimize the occurrence of this scenario.

Definitely.  In should only be sanctioned to generate HTML containing
images without actual alternative text when there is no alternative.
HTML5 currently distinguishes several scenarios, and for most of them
clearly and unambiguously states that alt text MUST be provided (and is
also more specific about the content of the alt text in order for it to
be conforming in providing a genuine alternative experience).

So, ignoring the issue of which syntax is used to denote those
'impossible' situations, have you got any specific suggestions for
either of:

* narrowing the definition of the situations in which alt text isn't to
  be provided (that is, moving some particular use-cases from the set
  which don't require alt text to those which do)?

* improving the wording so as to reduce the chance of somebody
  incorrectly getting the impression that alt text can be omitted in the
  situations in which it MUST be provided?

Smylers
Received on Thursday, 16 August 2007 12:05:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:48 UTC