- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 02:00:24 +0200
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, Al Gilman <alfred.s.gilman@ieee.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Laura Carlson 2008-08-11 16.29: > It seems as if this proposal is for meta data and might fit better in > a separate img attribute. In any event, it doesn't appear to be a text > equivalent per WCAG. [I use "@alt text keywords", as term for both the curly brackets and the role="photo tagged"/@tagged proposal.] I don't agree that the @alt text keyword proposal "is for meta data", if by that you have @role in mind. (See my reply to Rob [1].) Rather, for users, it offers a way to discern an @alt with a textual equivalent from an @alt with merely some general tags. For authors, it offers a method of what we could all "lesser degree of @alt text conformance". Hence, of course, whether it does actually conform, is an important question. We did, however, discuss the possibility of having a "minimum alt text" in keyword form a few times. Bear in mind that we discuss - I think - photo albums and that kind of stuff. It seems that WCAG is far more occupied with non-text content with a "meaning" or with a technical functionality - e.g see Technique G82 [2] and H37 [3] - than it is with photo albums. As an example of what in WCAG 2.0 such @alt text keywords *perhaps* could break, I have looked at F30. [4] F30 mentions "placeholder text", "programming refererences" (of the kind "picture 1", "picture 2") as non successful @alt text. I would say, however, that saying "photo" is one step up from e.g. "picture 1". On a photo web site, 'photo' as a keyword would be useful if it was restricted to photos, and not used on other graphics. We talk about conscious tagging, and not accidental programming output. Hence, I don't think it comes in the F30 cathegory. (I am not certain were to draw the line, though, between such keywords and "regular" alt text in abbreviated/keyword form.) [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Aug/0283.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20080430/G82.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20080430/H37.html [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20080430/F30.html#F30-examples -- leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 00:01:18 UTC