W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: use of the "d" link for images

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:11:24 -0700
Message-Id: <a0501041db70b9bdbdcb8@[]>
To: "Jeff Isom" <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 2:55 PM -0600 4/24/01, Jeff Isom wrote:
>I understand the purpose of the "d" link is to provide the user with a
>description of a complex graphic.  Should all images have "d" links or only
>those that are complex?

Depends on the graphic and what you're trying to do.  Many graphics get
by fine with just an appropriate ALT attribute.  There's probably
little point in noting that the image reading "Kynn's Page" is green
on a yellow background, but I suppose you really could if you wanted
to.  (I don't know of anyone who would insist that it's required.)

>In addition, it seems that using the "d" tag could be confusing to the user
>if there were a number of complex graphics on the page.  As the user tabbed
>throught the links they would hear "link d" . . . "link d" . . . "link d".
>They would have to work to figure out what image the link refers to.  I know
>this is convention for describing images, but is it the best approach?

No; the best approach is using LONGDESC.  But the browsers don't support
that.  Transcoding proxies -do-, however (or "can" at least), and so
there's a good reason right there to use LONGDESC instead of a
d-link.  LONGDESC is better because it's more explicit, easily
understood, and generally more attractive (being invisible), but the
browsers don't do much with it as mentioned.

Kynn Bartlett <kynn@reef.com>
Technical Developer Liaison
Reef North America
Tel +1 949-567-7006
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 17:30:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:12 UTC