W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2008

Re: there are markup options [was: Re: img/alt summary attempt]

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:09:29 +0000 (UTC)
To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Cc: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, public html for all <list@html4all.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0804151905000.3690@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Al Gilman wrote:
> In terms of meeting the HTML5 performance goals of minimizing 
> disruption, disruption to the accessibility checking community has to be 
> included as relevant.  Here, leaving @alt as a required attribute and 
> @alt="" as the code for "suitable to ignore" has performance benefits in 
> terms of not disrupting incumbent practice.  But this has to be weighed 
> against the potential benefits of change, and the steps taken to 
> mitigate the negative effects of change.

The problem is that there are _three_ states, not two:

 1. Image is not important. (alt="")
 2. Image is important, alternative text is available. (alt="...")
 3. Image is important, alternative text is not available.

Case 3 is the one we are discussing. Cases 1 and 2 are well understood and 
nobody is suggesting changing them.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 19:10:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:32 UTC