W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 1998

D-links

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 16:06:43 +1000 (EST)
To: WAI <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980720152338.24358L-100000@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Sue, I looked at the feedback page you posted.

For this little black duck the jury is well and truly settled on D-links. 
Use 'em.

The longer explanation:

The D-link satisfies the problem that LONGDESC, while a fine idea, doesn't
work in any browser. By the time it will work, people will be able to use
(and should be using) OBJECT to include their non-text objects anyway,
which will give them much greater possibilities to provide information. 

In the meantime, IF YOUR IMAGES (scripts, applets, etc) CONVEY IMPORTANT
INFORMATION, USE A D-LINK. (It's a big IF. Nobody else can decide how to 
answer that for you - it's part of your own skills)

If you don't want to clutter up your site with little D's, try the following:

<img src="images/charles2.gif" TITLE="charles" ALT="Charles" 
LONGDESC="images/charles2.html" ALIGN="LEFT"><A 
HREF="images/charles2.html" TITLE="Description of Charles2.gif"><IMG 
SRC="images/dot.gif" ALT="D-link" TITLE="link to description of 
Charles2.gif (previous picture)"></A>

which is taken from my personal page at http://www.srl.rmit.edu.au/charles

The basic idea is to use a single white dot, with the ALT text making it 
clear that this is a D-link. (Unfortunately the big browsers are making 
ALT text harder to find. But there are lots of good browsers out there)
Received on Monday, 20 July 1998 02:28:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:40 GMT