Re: Study project: ALTifier or text-equiv -- Please choose!

I think, this is a good argument as well. If we start to rely on
automatic conversion tools, web designers will abandon accessibility
problems at all. At least if designers would give meaningful names to
their images, like help.gif or options.gif, one could try to guess the
content of the image by cutting off the extion of the file. I use this
technique  lot in an ttempt to guess the destination of the image on
the page.
Best regards,
Victor





---"Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org> wrote:
>
> Al Gilman wrote:
> 
> >So I see application for the text-equiv techniques on both the
> >author and user side, and I see the author scenario encompassing
> >both automatic suggestions and manual judgement and rewording.
> 
> LRK::
> 
> Well, logically I have to agree with that, but, to reveal a personal
bias
> here, are there any cases where the automatic text would be as good
as text
> the author wrote him or herself, aside from 
> 
> - copying text link to a ALT text for image or image map area with
same URL
> - and visa versa of the above
> - all-text image read by OCR (tho even there an error
>   could produce a real knee slapper)
> 
> I'm worried that authors would get into habit of using the
automatically
> generated text in cases where it's inferior to what they could
easily do
> themselves.  
> 
> Len
> -------
> Leonard R. Kasday
> Institute on Disabilities/UAP at Temple University, Philadelphia PA
> email:     kasday@acm.org
> telephone: (215} 204 2247
> 
> 

==
Hi, visit me at:
http://tsarnet.home.ml.org

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Received on Monday, 26 October 1998 20:43:11 UTC