W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > September 2009

RE: 3.19 non-text alternatives Re: New Version of BP Addendum

From: Scheppe, Kai-Dietrich <k.scheppe@telekom.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:47:31 +0200
Message-ID: <FF6AD6C11AA23F4F9866E9A3C57602EDCB9DEB@QEO00217.de.t-online.corp>
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>, "Public MWBP" <public-bpwg@w3.org>

> the first "bad example" looks like it should be two examples.
> Rather than describing a particular image in the examples, 
> distinguish:
> a decorative image (one that merely provides rounded corners, 
> a picture of people that is additional to rather than a part 
> of the information presented, a spacer [if the page fails 
> 3.14] or the like), which should have alt=""; an icon, e.g. 
> used as a link to a table of contents which should have 
> alt="table of contents", or an icon used to flag a form field 
> as required which should have alt="required: " or the like; 
> an image convying real content such as a data chart, which 
> should have a non-visual representation of the data (e.g. 
> tabulated or in lists - but note relevant checkpoints here too).

I am sorry to say that I am not sure that your suggestion actually adds
clarity :-)

But, there is another error in this text and your are right, it should
be two examples

* An alt value that is the same as the filename alt=" " (space)

Should be

* An alt value that is the same as the filename 
* alt=" " (space)

-- Kai
Received on Friday, 18 September 2009 07:48:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:54 UTC