Re: a question about alt

James wrote:
>Distinguishing the cases alt="" and alt=" " would make it very easy to
>typo a meaningfully-different value and very hard to spot the mistake.
>If such an explicit indicator is desirable, using alt="" and noalt seems
>like a better solution.

I understand what you are saying. the reason I have suggested this is that a
new attribute would not be backwards compatible with assistive technology.
The alt=" " suggestion is treated by the assistive tech i have tested it
with, the same way as alt="" (the image is ignored with default settings).

On 06/09/07, James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Steve Faulkner wrote:
> > Once the arguments for omitting the alt attribute have been thoroughly
> > reseached. If it turns out that there are legitimate cases for
> > indicating that no alt has been provided, what would the arguments be
> > against using alt=" " (quote space quote) to signify an image that for
> > which an alt has been provided?
> >
> > This would differentiate it from cases where the author has not provided
> > an alt attribute/text on images that are not "critical content" out of
> > ignorance or laziness.
>
> Distinguishing the cases alt="" and alt=" " would make it very easy to
> typo a meaningfully-different value and very hard to spot the mistake.
> If such an explicit indicator is desirable, using alt="" and noalt seems
> like a better solution.
>
> --
> "Mixed up signals
> Bullet train
> People snuffed out in the brutal rain"
> --Conner Oberst
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html