ACTION-805

Hi Jo,

 

In today's audio, Miguel raised an interesting point regarding
alternatives for images

included as objects. Currently, mobileOK document only takes into
account alternatives for images

using img tag (NON-TEXT_ALTERNATIVES). But if an image is included using
an object tag (<object data="img.gif" type="image/gif></object>)

we don't look for alternatives. In object rule processing a check for
alternatives is made, but *only* for non supported formats (i.e the
previous

example would not be taking into account ).

 

In the discussion today we did not reach agreement whether it is worth
making the object rule processing more complex adding a check

for this case or just leave it as is. In any case, we agreed that a
warning would be sufficient.

 

Regards,

 

Abel.