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

Re: Improving alt (was handling fallback content for still images)

From: Jon Barnett <jonbarnett@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:47:10 -0500
Message-ID: <bde87dd20707110747ycaa86dcs60c4bf8ecd4baf8d@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dmitry Turin" <html60@narod.ru>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 7/11/07, Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru> wrote:
>
>
> Good day, Robert.
>
> RB> I'm wondering whether we need @alt in addition to @title?
> +1
>
> RB> 2) the rich fallback (sometimes through @longdesc)
>
> The following are better, than @longdesc:
>
> <link src="./a.jpg"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link>
> <link src="./a.mpg"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link>
> <link src="./a.wav"><i>rich</i> <b>fallback<b></link>
>
> Now <link> is not used inside <body>,
> so there is no any conflict.


Current browsers move <link> from inside <body> to the <head> as a void
element, and leave the "contents" of <link> in place.

For an all-purpose media element, I prefer <object>

I suggest that <img alt> element be used for "a piece of text with an
alternate graphical representation"
I suggest that either <img alt=''> or <img> without @alt be used for an
image that is purely decorative with no alternative content (but where CSS
alone wouldn't suffice)
I suggest that <object> be used for all other cases of images that cannot be
completely replaced with alternate text without changing the meaning of the
document (a photo in a photo gallery) and may or may not* need fallback
content for accessibility, and for any other images that require rich
fallback content.

As for why <video> and <audio> exist, I'm sure someone will write up the
wiki page detailing the advantages and disadvantages of <video> and <audio>
over <object>.

I don't think IE's poor handling of <object> fallback is enough reason to
abandon <object> for a new element, especially when browsers, including IE,
already support <object>

-- 
Jon Barnett
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2007 14:47:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:46 UTC