RE: Two new sites

> On pwWebspeak, an image, even with ALT="", is still announced. In general,
> the consensus of this discussion seems to be that it is better to have the
> image undescribed (by using ALT=""), than to state that it is a
> spacer image
> (ALT="spacer"). I'd be delighted to go with that option if that's the
> consensus.

This is, again, a default style option in webspeak. The default auditory
announcement for IMG, whether or not it has ALT and/or TITLE specified is to
say "Image". If you change the style for IMG to say nothing, and there is no
alt text or title, you hear nothing.

If you do have ALT and/or TITLE text, you will hear that, though. The order
of reading is TITLE first, then ALT. In some of the talking books we do, you
might have:

<IMG SRC="fig5-1.jpg" TITLE="Figure 5.1: Sea Otter" ALT="Picture of a sea
otter swimming in kelp bed." LONGDESC="fig5-1-desc.html">

This would get read (if IMG announcement is blank) as:

"Figure 5.1: Sea Otter, Picture of a sea otter swimming in a kelp bed. Long
Description available."

LONGDESC, if specified, is announced as "Long Description Available".



> One option is to add a hidden (to visual users) link to a
> pwWebspeak page (I have already done this) which explains that the images
> are mostly spacers, vertical rules, etc. and leave it at that.
>
Oh, please, not TEXT ONLY pages again.  If a site's visual layout is so
important to describe, then why not use something like (the under-utilised)
LINK tags in the header? We could get the PAGL to recommend <LINK
REL="DESCRIPTION" HREF="pagedescription.html" so that the author can provide
additional information about the structure, use, and navigation of the page?

The idea is NOT to create browser / accessibility specific pages.

Received on Sunday, 25 October 1998 14:18:28 UTC