W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2006

RE: nbsp ok for decorative alt?

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:03:30 -0500
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <009901c65cc9$13b50490$ee8cfea9@NC6000BAK>

Thanks

OK
The current technique says 

Alt="" is what should be used

Alt=" " is ok but Alt ="" is recommended

The case was made that if "" is used for spacers then text can in fact run
together.  

Then the case was made that if space was allowed then all types of
whitespace should be allowed. The question I have is whether that would
require AT to look for all types of whitespace? 

Should we not allow all whitespace but only space? 

Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jim Thatcher
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 11:55 AM
To: 'Michael Cooper'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: nbsp ok for decorative alt?


Michael cooper said:
<quote>
no negative effect that I know of
</quote>

How about fact that it appears visually as [] on mouse over in IE?

It is a simple mathematical fact that alt=" " is not empty. It is a sting of
length one consisting of the space character. So, repeating, it is not empty
alt-text. It is not null alt-text. It is alt-text consisting of one
character and should not be a recommended technique in the case you want
empty alt text. It is sloppy thinking!

However that does not stop someone from enhancing their text view by using
alt=" " as Michael suggests. In other words it is ok to use alt=" " if you
have a reason for doing so but should not be recommended for "empty or null
alt-text."

Oh well, I do have a thing about the importance of alt=""!

Jim
 
Accessibility Consulting: http://jimthatcher.com/
512-306-0931
Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 18:03:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:45 GMT