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

alt - data and reason Re: One more thought...

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 18:40:01 +0200
To: "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, wai-liaison@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.ubetwxhewxe0ny@>

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 18:23:03 +0800, Steven Faulkner  
<faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:

> Henri said
>> My point was that quantitative data about the magnitude of different
> phenomena around alt and how they average out is something we don't
> have.
> Agreed, and that is why I am remain unconvinced of the correctness of
> the theory that "requiring alt = bad". there is simply no publically
> available body of evidence that supports this theory.

Actually, we don't even have any decent qualitative data on this - and it  
is the crucial point in the entire debate. Since it really does hinge on  
*motive*, I think the best way to proceed on this question is to get some  
information from a group of tool developers, who can explain whether they  
do or don't abuse alt="" or leave out alt based on validity reqirements,  
thoughts about ugly tooltips, believing that there is nothing appropriate  
that could be said, or some other basis.

Until we have some useful and moderately convincing data, there is no  
clear reason to resolve ISSUE-31 one way or the other beyond conviction  
and guesswork. And it is quite clear that the results of those are not  
leading to consensus.



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals   Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Monday, 19 May 2008 16:40:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:31 UTC