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

Re: Another summary of alt="" issues and why the spec says what it says

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 05:23:49 +0000 (UTC)
To: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Cc: david.dailey@sru.edu, John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca>, HTML4All <list@html4all.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, wai-xtech@w3.org, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0804180523250.22086@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Jim Jewett wrote:
> On 4/17/08, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Jim Jewett wrote:
> 
> >>> ... sometimes there simply is no alternative text available.
> 
> >>> [examples]
> 
> >> [proposed (imperfect) alt text that actually was available]
> 
> > That would be a fine caption -- but as it should be visible to 
> > everyone,
> 
> How about making the alt optional if -- and only if -- the img has an 
> aria-describedby attribute?

Wouldn't that require that the image be described somewhere? The whole 
point here is that we don't know what the image is.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 18 April 2008 05:25:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:15 GMT