W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: RE: Image alt in WAI process intro

From: <hbjarno@mail.dk>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:01:10 +0200
To: Andrew Arch <Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org>
Cc: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, "EOWG \\(E-mail\\)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>, hbj@visinfo.dk
Message-Id: <20060919080109.OWEZ7979.fep28.mail.dk@mail.dk>

I asked about these alt texts a while ago as I was uncertain what Visually impaired users would prefer in this case, my experiences are similar to Andrew's from Vision Australia and  I second his suggestion: "null alt text"
Cheers
Helle
(I'm in Brussels and have to use my web-mail account)

Andrew Arch <Andrew.Arch@visionaustralia.org> wrote:
> 
> Shawn asked:
> > Right, so... what would *you* recommend for these
> particular images on
> this particular page?
> 
> I would recommend null alt text for the images adjacent to
> the five
> milestones. These have been provided as visual cues, and are
> purely
> complementary to the discussion beside them. The particular
> images used
> and their colours are not important.
> 
> This is similar to the rationale for why we have null alt
> text on the
> image of the magnifying glass adjacent to the "search" link.
> 
> Regards, Andrew
> ______________________
> Dr Andrew Arch
> Manager Online Accessibility Consulting
> Vision Australia - Accessible Information Solutions
> Ph. +61 (0)3 9864 9282; Mob: 0438 755 565
> http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/ais/
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org] On
> > Behalf Of Andrew Arch
> > Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2006 12:39 PM
> > To: love26@gorge.net; Shawn Henry
> > Cc: EOWG (E-mail)
> > Subject: RE: Image alt in WAI process intro
> >
> >
> > William wrote:
> > > Because we are the WAI, I think it's OK to use the
> descriptive text.
> >
> > We get two different responses from Vision Australia
> clients. Those
> who
> > have never had sight, want a fast reading page with
> minimal "noise",
> and
> > do not want alt text on images that are not 100%
> informative. Some of
> > the clients who have had sight, prefer to know what images
> are on the
> > page regardless.
> >
> > On this basis, as most sights are not for entertainment,
> we tend to
> lean
> > towards recommending minimal alt text, and only where it
> adds value.
> > Think about it as though you were reading the page to
> someone over the
> > telephone - do they need to know about the images? If yes,
> what do
> they
> > need to know?
> >
> > My two-bobs worth.  Andrew
> >
> > ______________________
> > Dr Andrew Arch
> > Manager Online Accessibility Consulting
> > Vision Australia - Accessible Information Solutions
> > Ph. +61 (0)3 9864 9282; Mob: 0438 755 565
> > http://www.visionaustralia.org.au/ais/
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-wai-eo-request@w3.org]
> On
> > > Behalf Of William Loughborough
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 19 September 2006 9:39 AM
> > > To: Shawn Henry
> > > Cc: EOWG (E-mail)
> > > Subject: Re: Image alt in WAI process intro
> > >
> > >
> > > Shawn Henry wrote:
> > >
> > > > What are your thoughts on providing descriptive alt
> text such as
> is
> > > > there now, or null alt text?
> > >
> > > Because we are the WAI, I think it's OK to use the
> descriptive text.
> I
> > > also think the null solution would be acceptable, but we
> should do
> > more
> > > than that for illustrative purposes.
> > >
> > > We might even include a note that although we're showing
> what we say
> > > we're showing, it's only marginally informative and
> could be "".
> > >
> > > Love.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > << ella for Spam Control >> has removed 2599 Spam messages
> and set
> aside
> > 2011 Read Later for me
> > You can use it too - and it's FREE!  www.ellaforspam.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> << ella for Spam Control >> has removed 2600 Spam messages
> and set aside
> 2012 Read Later for me
> You can use it too - and it's FREE!  www.ellaforspam.com	
> 
Received on Tuesday, 19 September 2006 11:15:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:39 UTC