- From: Colin F Reynolds <colin@the-net-effect.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 19:20:16 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.980206105841.26401B-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.E DU.AU>, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU> writes > > > And >in the "possible strategies", again we have a >description >of > information, instead of the information itself. <IMG src="logo.gif" >> alt="XYZ Logo"> cannot possibly be right, in my view. If the logo is >> there in order to identify the company, then the name of the company would >> be appropriate, e.g ALT="XYZ Corp", whereas if the company name is already >> present in clear text, then ALT="" would seem more appropriate, unless >> their logo is somehow pertinent to the topic under discussion, rather >> than mere identification. >The question here is whether it is important for the reader to know that >there is a logo present at this point in the document, as well as the name >of the company. Why do you feel that to be the case? Surely the logo merely serves to identify the company, and, if not present, a suitable ALTernative company identifier should appear in its place - the fact that the logo is not being displayed is irrelevant (not to mention obvious!). > The best solution to this problem would actually identify >both the name of the organisation and indicate the signifiance of the >logo. For an excellent example, see http://www.srl.rmit.edu.au I assume you refer to the first image on this page: <IMG SRC="http://www.srl.rmit.edu.au/images/1cmsunriselogo.gif" ALT="A smiling yellow sun rising into a blue sky: the sunrise logo" HEIGHT=23 WIDTH=22 ALIGN=RIGHT> IMO this is incorrect usage of ALT, since the additional information - that the image is a logo is of _no_ benefit to those who 1. have chosen not to load images 2. are using a web-to-speech device 3. are blind I would suggest that better examples for this image would be: A. ALT="" (since the page is already identified in the header) B. ALT=" Sunrise " (if it is deemed necessary to reinforce the message that this page is about an Organization called "Sunrise") If required, "A smiling yellow sun rising into a blue sky" would, IMO, be better included as a LONGDESC, describing the image. Option "A" above has the added benefit that <A HREF="http://www.the-net- effect.com/bad-tooltips.html">BAD</A> browsers don't show an irritating tooltip of the ALT content... >> With a little thought it's possible to choose ALT texts such that the text >> reads naturally, and the text-mode reader is scarcely aware of the >> "seams". Pages that have been composed "by rote", putting ALT="XYZ logo" >> whenever the logo occurs, tend to read idiotically on a text mode >> browser. Almost as bad as those that have ALT="large red bullet" etc. >I agree. The logo is best described perhaps only once, on the home page. >Thereafter, it could be treated as decorative and receive a null ALT >value. This assumes a linear reading of the site, which is not what happens in practice - visitors can, and will, drop in anywhere; so if your ALTernative information is deemed of sufficient import on one page, then shouldn't it appear everwhere else, too? >> I would rather say "The ALT text should substitute for the >> _purpose_ of the image; the mere description of the graphic will rarely be >> appropriate for doing that". >> >I agree. Me, too :) -- Colin Reynolds, The Net Effect (World Wide) Ltd http://www.the-net-effect.com/ Tel: +44 (0)1246 450 901 Fax: +44 (0)1246 450 902
Received on Monday, 9 February 1998 15:45:16 UTC