- From: Jon Barnett <jonbarnett@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 23:04:45 -0500
- To: "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, wai-liaison@w3.org, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear HTML WG members, > > The first draft of our rewrite of major sections of 3.12.2 "The img > element" in the HTML5 draft is now available: > > http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/uc/ > There are a couple use cases that have been discussed in depth on this lists but are omitted in this proposal: a) An image that is vital to content but its logical alternate text would be redundant: <figure> <img src="1100670787_6a7c664aef.jpg" ??? > <legend>My dog, Bubbles, digging in the sand on the beach.</legend> </figure> Surely alt="" would be incorrect - that would imply that the image is meaningless, just like an image that is "Purely Decorative" b) An image that is vital to content (such as a gallery image) for which the user simply did not provide text out of laziness: <img src="1100670787_6a7c664aef.jpg" ??? > If the user's tool generates alt="", that would imply that the image is meaningless. If the user's tool omits alt, the page's HTML is invalid the semantics are left undefined. The current HTML5 draft defines semantics for this case and UAs can use. The current HTML5 draft handle both of those use cases in a better manner by just omitting the alt attribute and still covers all the other use cases in this proposal. -- Jon Barnett
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2008 04:05:22 UTC