- From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce_Bailey@ed.gov>
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 08:34:49 -0500
- To: "'David Holstius'" <holstius@pilot.msu.edu>
- Cc: "'W3c-Wai-Ig'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Using ALT="" in the example you cite is quite reasonable. Please reference the current active thread at URL: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0808.html> > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of David Holstius > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 8:53 PM > To: W3c-Wai-Ig > Subject: Over-redundancy of ALT text? > > > Supposing that I wanted to provide both iconic and textual clues on a > navigation bar, how would I go about it? > > It seems like an idea that might be good: provide an icon of > a magnifying > glass sext to the word "search", etc. Might speed up > identification for the > average user as well as one with cognitive disabilities. But > under current > guidelines, how does one provide meaningful "alt" text for an > image that's > only there to enhance a nearby text (link)? > > Having a screen reader render "Icon: Magnifying glass", > "link: search", etc. > for 5 or so icon-link pairs seems like a waste of the user's time, > especially for something emphasizing brevity like a navbar. > Would using > alt="" carry that feeling of, "I don't know what this image > was supposed to > be"? > > David Holstius > holstius@msu.edu >
Received on Monday, 18 December 2000 08:35:08 UTC