- From: Clarke, Andrew <Andrew.Clarke@uk.michelin.com>
- Date: 24 Jan 2005 12:49:41 +0100
- To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Sirs I'm in the process of writing our approach document to WCAG requirements and naturally wish to use the latest 2.0 and understand that it is in draft form. I would like to add a little to the discussion, the document.... http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20041119/ I am concerned about section 9.4 Images and text links side by side The descriptive paragraph in 9.4 states that '...The preferred method to address this is to put the text and image together in one link, and provide null alternative text on the image to eliminate duplication of text.' and the example given is... Example: An icon and text are within the same link. The icon has null alt text and the text beside it describes the link. <a href="products.html"> <img src="icon.gif" alt="" /> Products page </a> This however conflicts with section 9.2 which states Task: Where appropriate, use the title attribute of the a element to clarify links. My 'confusion' exists in that in 9.4 having got rid of the alt text for the image where there is an image and text link side by side, you now have no alt or title text for either the image or the link. I feel that you should decide whether you are going to have a title element as in 9.2 or an image element as in 9.4. There should be a sequence of precedents where there are multiple active elements. My personal preference is that the hyperlink takes precedent as that is the operable element regardless of the fact that the anchor tag encloses an image. I've also read in issue 896 that... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Each link must contain text in only one place (title attribute, content or IMG alt attribute) if there are 5 or more A (anchor) elements in the document. Remove text from within the anchor until it appears in only one place. Anchors can contain text in their body content, TITLE attribute or IMG ALT text. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I feel that there should be a table or matrix of precedents of what is most appropriate in what circumstances if for no other reason than for consistency which has links to usability concepts. I'm sure however, somebody has already thought of it. Thanks in advance for any help you may give. Kind regards Andrew Clarke ________________________________________________________________________________ __ Andrew CLARKE Webmaster Corporate communications department EUR/C/I/EN Michelin Tyre Public Limited Company Campbell Road, Stoke-on-Trent, ST4 4EY, England Tel ext +44(0) 1782 403049 Tel int (7 440) 3049 Fax ext +44(0) 1782 401751 Fax int (7 440) 1751 e-mail: andrew.clarke@uk.michelin.com web : www.michelin.co.uk ________________________________________________________________________________ __ This email is intended only for the addressee named above and the contents should not be disclosed to any other person nor copies taken. If you are not the intended recipient and/or have received this message in error, disregard the content and return to sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Michelin Tyre PLC unless otherwise specifically stated. We do not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message nor responsibility for any change made to this message after original despatch. Nothing in this email is to be interpreted as an agreement on behalf of Michelin Tyre PLC. We do not accept liability for any damage sustained as a result of any software viruses. Michelin Tyre PLC reserves the right to monitor and record any emails addressed to any worker at Michelin Tyre PLC and the senders of messages shall be taken to have consented to such monitoring and recording. Michelin Tyre Public Limited Company Registered in England no.84559. Registered office Stoke-on-Trent ST4 4EY. ________________________________________________________________________________ __
Received on Monday, 24 January 2005 13:37:48 UTC