Re: use of the "d" link for images

the answer to your first question of when to use the d link or some form
of it is that if you cannot fit a meaningful bit of information about
the image in an alt tag, title or long desc or you think the long desc
might not be enough to provide exposure to the information and the image
needs Detailing to enhance the experience of the person approaching the
page, the d link or some form of it is in.

The second question is what form it should take.  I preffer telling
people what is being described such as: "description of web access
symbol".
another approach is to write a separate page and provide a link such as:
"descriptins of images on this page".  on the separate page, you can
write the descriptions and title them accordingly.  you can even do this
any way and use d links to call up the appropriate portions of the page
but this does not always work.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Isom" <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 4:55 PM
Subject: use of the "d" link for images


I understand the purpose of the "d" link is to provide the user with a
description of a complex graphic.  Should all images have "d" links or
only
those that are complex?  In other words, although a description of an
image
may not be essential to the content of the site, would it be a good idea
to
give the user and opportunity to experience the graphic in a more
meaningful
way?

In addition, it seems that using the "d" tag could be confusing to the
user
if there were a number of complex graphics on the page.  As the user
tabbed
throught the links they would hear "link d" . . . "link d" . . . "link
d".
They would have to work to figure out what image the link refers to.  I
know
this is convention for describing images, but is it the best approach?

Jeff

-----------------------------------
Jeffrey Isom
Instructional Designer
Web Accessibility in Mind (http://www.webaim.org)
Center for Persons with Disabilities
Utah State University
Logan, Utah   84322-6800
(435) 797-7582

Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2001 17:29:56 UTC