- From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 13:25:24 +0200
- To: <public-html@w3.org>
At 16:40 -0400 UTC, on 2007-06-21, Maurice Carey wrote: > On 6/19/07 2:32 PM, "Craig Francis" <craig@synergycms.com> wrote: [...] > In an html5 world... > > <figure> > <img> > <caption> > </figure> > ... Not need for alt there, the vision impaired user would know that the > figure is of a....whatever the captions says. If you have a picture of you, with a caption saying "Maurice Carey", then that caption is most certainly not an *alternative* to what's in the picture. People communicate through speech, text, music, images, touch, etc. An image is the expression of something through one of those forms. The alt attribute exists to communicate the *same* through another form. Each form of communication lends itself better for expressing certain things than another. That's why it is often quite difficult to come up with good ALT text. [...] > <li><a><img title="a butterfly" alt="an image of a butterfly"></a></li> > > That seems sort of pointlessly repetitive to me. Indeed. The text "an image of a butterfly" is complementary, not an alternative. It can make sense for a title attribute but is useless as ALT text. -- Sander Tekelenburg The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 11:26:11 UTC