W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: Microsoft's response on the ALT attribute and how Frontpage deals with it

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 14:43:34 +0100
Message-Id: <199901261343.OAA01868@www47.inria.fr>
To: Brian Kelly <lisbk@ukoln.ac.uk>
cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org

Just FYI for the group.
(it's a thread on the WAI IG list)


> Hi Daniel
>     Thanks for the reply, and pointing out what the guidelines say.
>     I must admit that I think the guidelines are wrong :-(  Forcing all
> automatically generated ALT information to contain a null string means that
> nobody is provided with information which can be useful in circumstances.
> To be it seems intuitively wrong for an authoring / conversion tool to throw
> away resource metadata.  I would argue it would be better for the
> information to be provided and then filtered out if necessary.
>    I'd also argue that the guidelines should at least say that authoring
> tools should provide options for creating null or automatically generated
> ALT text, so that an organisation has some choice in this matter (e.g. the
> BBC might choice to provide this information as they have their Betsie tool
> for stripping out information).
>     Brian
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus
> UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, England, BA2 7AY
> Email:  b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk     URL:    http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
> Homepage: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly.html
> Phone:  01225 323943            FAX:   01225 826838
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
> To: Brian Kelly <lisbk@ukoln.ac.uk>
> Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; B.K. DeLong <bkdelong@naw.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 1999 12:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Microsoft's response on the ALT attribute and how Frontpage
> deals with it
> 
> 
> >
> >> I think you're being unfair in yopur response.  An authoring tool has
> three
> >> options for providing defaults ALT values - give a null string, give a
> >> standard chunk of text "This is an image" or provide information
> >> automatically derived from the image file "Size =100 Kb".  Of these
> >> alternatives, I think the latter is preferable.
> >>
> >> What concrete suggestion would you make to vendors of authoring tools?
> >
> >The WAI has a Working Group working on Guideliens for Authoring Tools,
> >here's what they say in the latest draft (Jan 12)
> >  http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WD-WAI-AUTOOLS
> >
> >2.5.8: [Priority 1]
> >  The authoring tool must never insert rule-generated description
> >  text into the document (default "alt"-text) or a properties field
> >  (place-holder "alt"-text). Automated processes may only place
> >  pre-authored (by a person) text when the meaning or function of the
> >  described object is known with certainty.
> >
> >In other word, default alt values is a no-no, mostly because it then
> >makes it very hard for repair tools of all kind to do their job
> >effectively, since they cannot really look for missing data.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 1999 08:47:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 September 2008 15:52:54 GMT