W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Discussion: Text Alternative Survey

From: Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:36:52 -0700
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
CC: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DC759FBF-9FC3-490C-A88C-2D2A136E65CD@adobe.com>
On Apr 23, 2010, at 6:21 PM, David Singer wrote:
> They *like* 'lies' and/or useless values?

No, the opposite.

>  I clearly need to learn something here.  And this paragraph seems to be self-contradictory:  we don't object to 'generated' text as long as it doesn't appear in the place where the text has to appear?  

Not "generated text", an @generated attribute.

> Or is this saying they'd like *another* attribute 'missing-alt="true and the authoring tool knows it and yes I have asked him twice this morning to deal with it!"'?

Yes. Or rather, just an attribute that affirms that the author did not (and does not intend to) provide @alt, without a text value.

I think this is a fair compromise between the people who value accessibility, and the ones who don't, but still want to be valid. Either way, they need to do something in line with their preference in order to validate.

Received on Friday, 23 April 2010 23:37:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:35 UTC