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

Re: aside and figure elements

From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:35:56 +0100
To: "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Shelley Powers" <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "HTML Accessibility Task Force" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.vdxph6uvh8on37@bruce-pc>
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:19:09 +0100, Steven Faulkner  
<faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi bruce,
> <figure>
> <img src=ceo.jpg alt="">
> <figcaption>Brian Slick, CEO of Blammo Corp, leveraging a  
> synergy</figcaption>
> </figure>
>> seems entirely accessible (?)
> the issue i see with this is that using alt="" says the image can be
> safely ignored. A caption is a label for something so the presence of
> the image needs to be exposed.

Doesn't the fact that there is an <img> element expose the existence of  
the element, regardless of its attributes?

Or maybe it's just that I have a pavlovian mistrust of images with no alt  
attribute, so I automatically wanted to put empty alt on the image.

What about

<img src=ceo.jpg>
<video src=ceo.webm></video>
<figcaption>Brian Slick, CEO of Blammo Corp, pushes the  

My point being that the caption is for both the image and the video, and  
is not tied exclusively to the image

Hang loose and stay groovy,

Bruce Lawson
Web Evangelist
www.opera.com (work)
www.brucelawson.co.uk (personal)
Pre-order my HTML5 book www.introducinghtml5.com
Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 14:36:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:40 UTC