W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2008

[whatwg] several messages

From: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:41:24 +0200
Message-ID: <D3350E5C0F25467C922EE3E5A063D662@POCZTOWIEC>
In this particular case, the author assumes that the browser does not show
the image but informs the user that it can be downloaded.  This text makes
no sense if the image is already displayed.  
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: whatwg-bounces@lists.whatwg.org
[mailto:whatwg-bounces at lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of Ian Hickson
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:50 AM
To: Nicholas Shanks; Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis; Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Simon Pieters; WHAT Working Group Mailing List
Subject: Re: [whatwg] several messages

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> 
> > I guess we have to agree to disagree here, but I think
> > <image src="foo">Download Foo 1.4<br><small>(12 <abbr
> > title="Megabytes">MB<abbr>)</small></image>
> > is preferable to
> > <img src="foo" alt="Download Foo 1.4 (12 MB)">
> > which it would appear you prefer.
> 
> Yeah. An abbreviation such as MB should be known by an accessibility 
> client anyway and I think it's also perfectly capable of dealing with a 
> few parenthesis. Besides, the latter has been standard practice for over 
> a decade and trying to change authoring habbits with respect to that now 
> seems silly. Besides, you can use <object> if you really care about 
> "proper" fallback.

In any case, what's the image in the case above? Why would you ever want 
that text _not_ visible when the image was visible?
   
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 01:41:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:03 UTC