Untitled Document

The most effective way I'd say to rotate the image and to make sure the correct alt and long desc tags are present.  is to use client side scripting to replace the picture the alt tags and the long desc- not javascript.  the user will be oblivious to the change and it won't matter is javascript is on or not.  much more elegant!  I believe Jefferey  Zeldman <www.zeldman.com> talks about it .

As for the content of the long desc or alt tags make them  as descriptive as possible why should I miss out on the picture if I can't *see* it ! 

e | me@josephleech.co.uk

w| www.josephleech.co.uk



Juan Ulloa wrote:
Is it discrimination if a developer makes a website nicer to look at?  If
the image is considered simple eye candy, can't the developer simple alt tag
or even an empty alt tag?  

<devils advocate with a tad bit of sarcasm>
When you view a website that has photographs using lynx or Jaws and you run
over an image that has an alt attribute that reads "photo of Jim" or "corner
graphic"  Do you ponder about the way Jim looks like or how if the corner
graphic has a nice beveled curve.  Or does the developer have the
responsibility to be more specific with the alt descriptions.  Should the
alt attributes read: "Full body photograph of Jim: buck teeth, brown hair,
blue eyes, about 5 feet tall and dressed in denim " and "blue corner graphic
with a smooth edge connecting the left navigation color and the top
navigation bar." But maybe that's not enough, maybe I should use the
original alt attributes and apply long descriptions for each, this way I can
explain that Jim is smiling at the camera, that his denim pants have a rip
on them slightly above his left knee and that his socks don't match because
he is British.  I mean, his socks don't match, AND he is British.  Can I
include humor in my longdesc page, or do I have to stick to the facts?
</devils advocate with a tad bit of sarcasm>

  Juan C. Ulloa

  
-----Original Message-----
From: William R Williams [mailto:wrwilliams@fs.fed.us]
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 9:03 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: JavaScript Visual Effects






Hello,

You've accomplished an adequate job in the alt statement of describing the
process of presenting the 3 photographs on neaglesrock.com. Still, I have
some difficulty anytime one indicates, as you have, that no important
information is conveyed in the image(s). If this is the case, why is the
photo there in the first place?

In fact, doesn't it seem a discriminatory practice to have the image
"viewable" to those who can actually see it on-screen but to indicate to
others that no important information is presented therein?

I understand that "timeliness" of information is an important
accessibility
concern; yet, it seems to me that a workable solution for this
presentation
is to simply link to a "web page" that contains the 3 separate photos and
meaningful alts or descriptions in context. I've done exactly that for a
similar presentation; i.e., a randam photos Javascript:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/about/index.shtml
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/about/op-foos.html

Bill Williams