W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2006

RE: nbsp ok for decorative alt?

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:09:51 -0500
Message-ID: <6EED8F7006A883459D4818686BCE3B3B039B8BC3@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "Gez Lemon" <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

By definition, <code>alt="&npsp;"</code> is not null. In my opinion, it
should not satisfy the SC1.1.1 requirement about decorative non text


"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Gez Lemon
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 6:22 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: nbsp ok for decorative alt?

Hi Gregg,

On 10/04/06, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu> wrote: <quote> We
had a technique that said

ALT="" and  ALT=" " were ok

but ALT=&amp;nbsp; was not.

But this has recently been questioned.  We need to decide on this one.

Is ALT=&amp;nbsp;  OK? Or not?

&nbsp; is a presentational character entity. img {white-space: pre;} in
CSS would achieve the same result.

Best regards,

Supplement your vitamins
Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 13:10:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:45 UTC