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

Re: fear of "invisible metadata"

From: Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:26:11 -0400
To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C2A05723.2D88%maurice@thymeonline.com>

On 6/19/07 2:12 PM, "aurélien levy" <aurelien.levy@free.fr> wrote:

> 
> Did you have any official stats about that ? First keep in mind that
> actually a big majority of people doesn't care at all about validation
> so i don't think that the empty alt just for validation is really more
> used that a correct used of the empty alt.
> Ask to users if they prefers to have page with complete URL or files
> names every times the AT comes to an image or simply a page where this
> useless information is skipped.
> 
> In my mind, if the spec must change on the alt attribut is more to test
> that images in a link don't have an empty alt because in that case it
> make it totaly inaccessible.
>> 
>> Yes, but the majority of cases in the wild @alt="" is not used because
>> the image is semantically devoid of meaning, but rather because the
>> author hasn't given any alternative.
>> 
>> 
>> - Geoffrey Sneddon
>> 


Before I discovered CSS I'd say about 99.3% of my <img> tags had empty alts
because they were totally devoid of semantic meaning. Same thing goes for
every designer I've ever worked with.

It wouldn't surprise me if 90% of the alt-less images on the web were named
"spacer.gif"

-- 
::   thyme online ltd
::   po box cb13650  nassau  the bahamas
::   website: http://www.thymeonline.com/
::   tel: 242 327-1864  fax: 242 377 1038
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 20:26:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:01 GMT