- From: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 20:05:10 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
The difference between the two examples illustrates two schools of thoughts. [ cut two examples with figure/img/figcaption see for references http://www.w3.org/mid/Pine.LNX.4.64.1006072239310.22659@ps20323.dreamhostps.com ] 1. Descriptive In which the alt tag is used to described what is in the image. 2. Text flow In which the alt tag is given an empty value (alt="") because it would be awkward in the text flow without images. Both cases could be valid. It depends on the context and what the text author would like to convey to the readers. It also depends on how "figcaption" element would be treated by assistive technologies. Something part of the text or something special with a marker. For example, in a vocal browser saying something like: "IMAGE CAPTION blablabla" or just "blablabla" If the vocal browser says "IMAGE CAPTION" then the alt with a meaningful content seems to be necessary. -- Karl Dubost Montréal, QC, Canada http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 00:05:43 UTC