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

Re: fear of "invisible metadata"

From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:14:09 +0200
Message-Id: <p06240638c2a1933d3aeb@[192.168.0.102]>
To: <public-html@w3.org>

At 10:39 -0400 UTC, on 2007-06-22, Maurice Carey wrote:

> On 6/22/07 7:25 AM, "Sander Tekelenburg" <st@isoc.nl> wrote:
>
>>> <li><a><img title="a butterfly" alt="an image of a butterfly"></a></li>
>>>
>>> That seems sort of pointlessly repetitive to me.
>>
>> Indeed. The text "an image of a butterfly" is complementary, not an
>> alternative. It can make sense for a title attribute but is useless as ALT
>> text.
>
> What would you have put for the alt then?

No way to say without having seen the image and knowing what it is meant to
convey. (The context is usually needed to know as well.)

It might be that you use the image to describe the details of a particular
butterfly. In that case a textual description of those details (shape,
colours, etc.) might be the proper ALT text.
Or it might be that the image is used to demonstrate the result of certain
settings on a photo camera. In that case a textual description of lighting,
sharpness, etc. of the image, might  be the right ALT text. Maybe even
without mentioning the butterfly at all.
Or it might be that the image is used to convey that spring has arrived. In
which case "Spring has arrived" is the proper ALT text.

As an author, the easiest way to figure out what the right ALT text is is
usually to remove the image and figure out how to replace it with text such
that you don't miss the image anymore.


-- 
Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 15:16:32 GMT

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