Re: ALT vs. TITLE usage in WAI logo example

You're probably right that getting consensus on exactly what to use for ALT 
text here would be difficult or not impossible.

Years ago, when I first got into web accessibility, I sent around an 
informal survey asking people who were blind what they preferred in ALT 
text.  Things like, to use "bullet" or an asterisk for an image of a 
bullet.  Even among actual users who were blind I got differing opinions on 
all questions... including questions on which people, mostly sighted, had 
strong logical, philisophical arguments for one or the other option.   I'd 
be happy to drop this particular question for now, and use list bandwidth 
for bigger topics that i need to get back to...

Len

At 10:47 AM 12/29/00 -0500, Al Gilman wrote:
>At 09:25 AM 2000-12-29 -0500, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:
> >Hmmm.  Speaking of small problems with the logo, presently the image has
> >
> >ALT="Level Double-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility
> >Guidelines 1.0"
> >
> >Following the principle that ALT should be an equivalent for what the
> >sighted person sees, would it not be better to have
> >
> >ALT="W3C: WAI triple A, WCAG 1.0."
> >
> >The longer description is an explanation that in principle is seen by
> >everyone, so it should be the TITLE
> >
> >TITLE="Level Double-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility
> >Guidelines 1.0"
> >
>
>AG:
>
>I have to admit to a violent negative reaction to this suggestion.
>
>Both of the above spellings for ALT text satisfy the sense of 'equivalent' as
>used in checkpoint 1.1.  It is a loose equivalence and they both meet this
>loose criterion.  It is an equivalence of sense; not of spelling.  And at the
>more superficial level that you are evaluating 'equivalence' in the above, the
>answer is _no_, the ALT should not be 'equivalent' to the visual presentation
>_in those terms_.  It should be _different_ in those terms so as to be both a)
>equivalent at the deeper level and b) effective in the alternative
>presentation.  The ALT text as understood when heard should be equivalent to
>what the sighted user understands on seeing the visual logo.  "What the
>sighted
>user _sees_" is too medium-specific to be the base for equivalence
>comparison.
>"What the sighted user _learns_" is closer.
>
>The fact is that telegraphic diction such as exemplified by the suggested
>alternative ALT above works in a visual environment where the user can random
>scan over the component elements, and does not work well in a serial pass over
>the content such as in synthetic speech.  The more expanded version is more
>likely to be comprehensible when read aloud than is the series of cryptic
>blurps.
>
>I have to realize that the intensity of my reaction is probably because the
>distinction is subtle and sustaining a consensus for any resolution of such a
>subtle distinction is tenuous.
>
>Backing off from the initial reaction, I think that the meta-guideline that
>this suggestion violates is that "the ALT text should be easy to grasp
>(follow)
>when read aloud in context."
>
>This may sound like "the ALT text should be designed for how it appears in
>Lynx."  That is my home base of experience and bias.  But what the Lynx
>display
>communicates to me, the sighted, is some of what make the ALT text
>effective or
>ineffective communication in serial speech presentation.  Which we do need to
>care about, even while it is not the only presentation we want to make
>effective.
>
>Al
>
> >Len
> >
> >
> >At 02:07 PM 12/26/00 -0500, Bailey, Bruce wrote:
> >>I hesitate to bring it up, but there is also the issue that the official
> >>versions have some flaws.  There was the issues with .png files being 
> served
> >>instead of .gif (I think that's been resolved) and coming up blank with 
> some
> >>popular browsers.  The WAI button don't use the "browser safe" palette and
> >>are larger (in bit depth and pixel size) than they need to be. The WAI
> >>conformance icons also don't match up nicely with the other W3C banner
> >>buttons (the "W3C" portion is too small).  Take a look at the bottom of the
> >>W3C home page to see what I mean.  It's been about a year since I first
> >>pointed these picayune problems out.  Any chance they will be fixed?
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
>[<mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org%5DOn>mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On
> >> > Behalf Of Leonard R. Kasday
> >> > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 3:13 PM
> >> > To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> >> > Subject: local copies of WAI logo
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Here's what I hope is a really simple question.
> >> >
> >> > The present conformance page
> >> >
><http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1-Conformance.html>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1-Co
>nformance.html
> >> >
> >> > says to
> >> > reference the copy of the logo on the w3c servers
> >> >
> >> > <A
>href="<http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1A-Conformance>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1A
>-Conformance"
> >> > title="Explanation of
> >> > Level A Conformance">
> >> > <IMG height="32" width="88"
> >> > src="<http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag1A>http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag1A"
>alt="Level
>A conformance
> >> > icon, W3C-WAI
> >> > Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0"></A>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Is there any problem in simply coping the logo onto the page?
> >> >  In other
> >> > words, the only difference would be to replace src with something like
> >> >
> >> > src="images/wcag1A.gif"
> >> >
> >> > which refers to the local copy on the site?
> >> >
> >> > Len
> >
> >--
> >Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
> >Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple
> >University
> >(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
> ><http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday>http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday
><mailto:kasday@acm.org>mailto:kasday@acm.org
> >
> >Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
> >http://<http://www.w3.org/>www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/
> >
> >The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant:
> ><http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/>http://www.temple.edu/
>inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
> >

--
Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
University
(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/

Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 11:08:56 UTC