W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2007

What now ALT?

From: John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:58:01 -0700
To: "'HTMLWG'" <public-html@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Cc: "'advocate group'" <list@html4all.org>
Message-ID: <007301c805e6$f143d2b0$c62b42ab@Piglet>

In light of the fact that a judge today ruled that the suit against
Target.com can become a class action suit, and that one of the key
complaints is that many of the images do not have alt text, or appropriate
alt text...

This writer wonders aloud what the judge would think about sites that
deliberately did not include alt text, or did not programmatically allow for
the inclusion of alt text...

	"The court's decision today makes clear that people with
disabilities no longer can be treated as second-class citizens in any sphere
of mainstream life. This ruling will benefit hundreds of thousands of
Americans with disabilities." - Larry Paradis, Disability Rights Advocates
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2191625,00.asp

	"All e-commerce businesses should take note of this decision and
immediately take steps to open their doors to the blind." - Dr. Marc Maurer,
president of the National Federation of the Blind.
http://tinyurl.com/33jszq


It would seem pretty fool-hardy to create an online application or site that
did not allow for the insertion of alt text; especially if the above results
in serious grief for Target.com.  A future spec might be conformant without
alt text, but a judge might still award damages; making the exercise
theoretically moot.

Score one for social engineering!

JF
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 17:58:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:27 GMT