- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:17:24 +0000
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 09:19:17 -0500, Matthew Raymond <mattraymond at earthlink.net> wrote: > ...should look like this... > > <img src="image.png"> > > What are everyone's thoughts on this? It makes quality assurance harder, since visual indication of alt is not obvious from testing, automated scripts are used which can easily ensure that no alt attributes that are needed are missed. Making it implied makes this harder. It also makes user agents that use the absense of an alt attribute a trigger for fix up behaviour unable to tell when it should carry out the fix up, either leading it to not bother attempting it or to attempt it so aggressively that it has to spend loads of time on doing it on each and every image. WIth both of these reasons, and not a single reason from you as to why it would be beneficial, I think it's an easy decision to leave it as is. Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 5 January 2005 07:17:24 UTC