- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:13:08 -0800
- To: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>, WAI-GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 5:15 PM -0500 12/5/01, Joe Clark wrote: >I have been working up to making the case that all the WCAG >documents, even the normative ones, should be written in a much more >conversational form. >I would thus advance the proposal that an explanation of alt, title, >and longdesc could read as follows-- informal and immediately >understandable. Aside from style issues, I'm not sure I agree with these definitions. >alt, title, and longdesc provide basic, intermediate, and advanced >information about a graphic. The idea that alt, title, and longdesc are a hierarchy of information is, in my opinion, confusing and not to spec, specifically when talking about the @title attribute. @title has a specific definition in HTML, and it's not "intermediate information" when applied to a graphic. >1. alt tells you the function or purpose of the graphic-- >*essential* information. >2. title tells you more about the graphic-- nice-to-know or >explanatory information. >3. longdesc tells you everything you ever wanted to know about the >graphic-- thorough, encyclopedic information. Apart from the style, the content of these definitions is lacking. For example, you have redefined @alt so it's no longer "a text equivalent" but is now "the function or purpose" in a minimal way. The @title is now "nice-to-know" but this gives me little idea when to use @title and when not. The @longdesc definition makes no reference to the fact that, unlike the others, it's a URI -- and what's more, "encyclopedic information" is still not quite what longdesc is for, since it's not necessarily true that @longdesc is everything you ever wanted to know. For example, few people would state that @longdesc needs to describe who snapped a picture, with what type of camera, what software was used to process it, on what platform, etc., but conceivably that's "encyclopedic information." I don't mind the informal _style_ at all but i think the specific definitions need work, as I don't believe they're usable or useful as a recommendation to web developers. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 04:34:36 UTC