- From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:13:24 -0500
- To: WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@W3.org>
Here is a recurring bugbear I mentioned the other day.
When it comes to providing alternate text for images, current WCAG
only ever bothers to talk about alt (universally supported, but short
and limited) and longdesc (almost completely unsupported, and way too
big most of the time). Meanwhile, the tremendously useful title
attribute, supported by virtually everything save for Netscape 4 and
OutSpoken for Macintosh, is ignored completely.
title sits halfway between alt and longdesc. You can load it up with
several sentences of text and it will still display even in monopoly
browsers like Windows IE. Very often, four or five words in an alt
and a couple of sentences in a title fully and completely sum up an
image.
As one of the "common attributes," title is looked down upon as Not
Really Being Our Kind of Thing Here. Since you can slap a title on
essentially everything, it is seen as not access-specific enough. But
it's perfectly useful for accessibility. In fact, it is already used
for accessibility. I know lots of page authors who never write a
hyperlink or include an image without a title on each. And if the big
screen readers cannot gain access to title text, they need to be
upgraded; it's basic HTML.
So what I am suggesting is that title be explicitly included in WCAG
2.0 as a form of text equivalent for a wide range of objects,
including images and multimedia. I assume this would not be a
difficult thing to include and would not require huge rewrites.
--
Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org | <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Accessibility articles, resources, and critiques ||
"I can't pretend to understand the mind of Joe Clark"
-- Larry Goldberg
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 13:14:14 UTC