W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: [html4all] New issue: IMG section of HTML5 draft contradicts WCAG 1 & WCAG 2 (draft)

From: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:24:57 +0100
Message-ID: <47FF4A89.2080008@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: HTML4All <list@html4all.org>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, wai-xtech@w3.org, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>



Julian Reschke wrote:

 > A string saying "there is no alternate text" may be syntactically valid,
 > but doesn't help the user at all.

I disagree ...

  It will be displayed/read just like it
 > was the alternate text.

Yes,it will; and if, when displayed/read, it
explains to the end user /why/ there is no
ALT text (available), then he/she will be
better informed than if it were simply
omitted.  We could postulate, for example,
by analogy with ARIA, that there be conventions
for indicating the reason for the omission of
more meaningful ALT text.
 >
 > In general, requiring values for things that can't always be provided is
 > a bad idea. It always leads to authors making up values, which makes the
 >  situation *worse* for the people depending on it.

Not if there are well-defined rules for these
"made up" values.

** Phil.
Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 11:25:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:54 UTC