- From: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:24:57 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: HTML4All <list@html4all.org>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, wai-xtech@w3.org, Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > A string saying "there is no alternate text" may be syntactically valid, > but doesn't help the user at all. I disagree ... It will be displayed/read just like it > was the alternate text. Yes,it will; and if, when displayed/read, it explains to the end user /why/ there is no ALT text (available), then he/she will be better informed than if it were simply omitted. We could postulate, for example, by analogy with ARIA, that there be conventions for indicating the reason for the omission of more meaningful ALT text. > > In general, requiring values for things that can't always be provided is > a bad idea. It always leads to authors making up values, which makes the > situation *worse* for the people depending on it. Not if there are well-defined rules for these "made up" values. ** Phil.
Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 11:25:30 UTC