W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: talking about text alternatives Re: ALT as required attribute

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 23:12:00 -0000
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <b1s639$q9l$1@main.gmane.org>


"David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:200302052104.h15L4vH02190@djwhome.demon.co.uk...
>
> > provide for alternative text - SVG uses child elements instead which
>
> So does HTML, it's just that browser developers don't really see
> object other than as an ActiveX container, so images as object are
> badly handled.

Images as objects are badly specified though, since the UA cannot know it's
an image until after it's performed an HTTP GET on the url, it can guess it
might be, but cannot know.

Equally, what happens with an HTML document returned with a 404 status code
returned by the server, should the object fallback be used, or should the
HTML document be used?  What about other status codes?  At least with image,
you know the author intended it to be an image, and not just about anything.

Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 18:20:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT