- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 23:15:44 +0000 (UTC)
- To: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, James Craig wrote:
>
> I meant to add a potential solution as to the wording. The current wording is:
>
> If the src attribute is set and the alt attribute is not
> The image might be a key part of the content, and there is no textual
> equivalent of the image available.
>
> Source: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-img-element
>
> I believe this wording would be more clear.
>
> If the src attribute is set and the alt attribute is not
> The image is assumed to be a key part of the content, and there is no textual
> equivalent of the image available.
"is assumed" is descriptive phraseology. Whom is it assumed by? Why?
I used "might be" because this is a sentence giving a definition. It's not
absolute ("is") because there are error cases to handle as well.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 2 February 2009 23:16:28 UTC