- From: Alastair Campbell <ac@nomensa.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:16:02 +0100
- To: david poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- CC: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
david poehlman wrote: > If you decide that your > image has no meaning, why put it up at all? same for other nulls. I know, > the arguments against this proposal, but it makes perfect sense to me not to > use something if there is no real cause to use it other than for passing > some sort of test... There are some valid uses for decorative images. They can be used to round off corners and other visual flourishes. CSS can be used for a lot of these, but occasionally you might find browser support tricky, so resort to a foreground image. Giving them any real description would probably drive screen reader users up the wall, so applying a null alt text should save a few walls ;) Whether null table summaries become standard may depend on how the user agents deal with them, including the accessibility checkers. If bobby is going to insist on you using a summary on every table to 'pass', people are going to add summaries. Rather than having "this is a layout table" read out 15 times per page, null would be better. Wouldn't it? -Alastair -- Alastair Campbell | Director of Technology Please refer to the following disclaimer for this message: http://www.nomensa.com/email/disclaimer.html
Received on Friday, 27 August 2004 16:15:59 UTC