- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 11:23:33 -0700
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
At 01:45 p.m. 04/08/99 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >Oh, maybe so. seems these days I get lots of [something_unhelpful.gif] but >not much [IMAGE] Actually from a purely informational point of view, the former [something_unhelpful.gif] contains more POTENTIALLY useful information than either " " or [IMAGE]. Now, you and I know that they it SUCKS as ALT text, and nobody should ever use it, but looking at it practically, there is at least the potential for some useful info to be conveyed by the filename, and none by the simple [IMAGE] substitution. I would 1000% times more desire to see LEGITIMATE, well-written alternative text, but when given the choice of three evils, my prefs would run [filename.gif] [IMAGE] " ". -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@hwg.org> President, Governing Board Member HTML Writers Guild <URL:http://www.hwg.org>
Received on Thursday, 8 April 1999 14:27:22 UTC