- From: Matt May <mcmay@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:30:55 -0700
- To: "Jonathan Chetwynd" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Chetwynd" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com> > http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html > > 1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element [...] > > This does not mention links. 13.1 (Clearly identify the target of each link) is the relevant checkpoint for links and the title attribute. > If it is the case that alt should describe the image and title the link, do > we need to state this? > if title is not appropriate for a description of the link, where should the > link description be? The preferred method of link description is clear link text. According to the 1.0 techniques (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#link-text), title is only necessary in the absence of clear link text which, presumably, would be provided in an image's alt text. In a case where the image itself presents content separate from the purpose of the link (e.g., a picture of the Mona Lisa, which is a link to arts), both could be necessary. But in most cases, I believe, the functional content of a linked image is the necessary text equivalent. That is, this: <a href="search.html"><img src="magnifyingglass.gif" alt="Search" /></a> is preferable to this: <a href="search.html" title="Search"><img src="magnifyingglass.gif" alt="a magnifying glass"></a> But in any case, this need is already provided for in both WCAG versions. - m _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 14:30:59 UTC