Re: HTML Action Item 54 - ...draft text for HTML 5 spec to require producers/authors to include @alt on img elements.

(BTW, I replied to you off-list because I didn't see the purpose of 
clogging people's inboxes up with what is a tangential debate of a 
tangential point, largely unrelated to the technical issues which a 
language design list should be discussing.)

Gez Lemon wrote:
> 2008/5/21 Andrew Sidwell <takkaria@gmail.com>:
>>> Considering not being able to view content in a browser as a much,
>>> much bigger accessibility problem for you than missing alt text
>>> demonstrates a total lack of empathy.
>> It demonstrates no such thing, because the statement was explicitly
>> qualified with "for me".
> 
> I included the qualification in my response. Comparing something that
> can easily be changed against an aspect of a person that cannot be
> changed does show a lack of empathy.

Except that's not what the comparison is.  It's a comparison between an 
individual's ability to view the content at all and that individual's 
ability to see some particular bit of the content; if you can't do the 
first, the second is irrelevant until you can.

You seem to be saying that the comparison is actually between an 
individual's ability to view the content at all and everyone's ability 
to see some particular bit of the content.  In this case, perhaps your 
comments might stand, but that's attacking a strawman since the original 
post clearly didn't mean it like that.

(rest of the post snipped since the rest of it is tangents of tangents, 
or discussion of analogies or metaphors, and no-one really wants that)

-- 
Andrew Sidwell

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2008 14:48:45 UTC