W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

RE: Adaptive Image Element Proposal

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 22:41:49 +0200
To: Adrian Roselli <Roselli@algonquinstudios.com>
Cc: Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com>, Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, "public-respimg@w3.org" <public-respimg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120904224149636712.82eaaab1@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Adrian Roselli, Tue, 4 Sep 2012 20:14:46 +0000:
> I'd rather see <picture>'s fallback rely on the existing momentum 
> <img> has with its @alt -- just rely on <img> to be the fallback both 
> for the alternate image and the @alt text. Leave @alt off <picture> 
> altogether.

Just wanted to point out that what Adrian proposes here - <img> as the 
element which takes care of the alternative text - is a variant (a 
subset) of what Steve said: alternative text should be provided via 
markup rather than via an attribute on the picture element.

If we say that <picture> should have img role, then we imply that 
alternative text should be provided via an attribute. This means that 
AT will pick the alternative text from the img element, as long as they 
don't support picture. Fine. But it also means that at the moment when 
picture support is enabled, they will suddenly start to take the 
alternative text from another element - picture. This would work fine 
as long as authors really do offer both - and the same content in both. 
But it also means that, in other cases, the users will get a different 
experience, based on whether the UA/AT supports - or not - the picture 
element.
-- 
leif h silli
Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 20:42:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 September 2012 20:42:23 GMT